![correct, and the word as should be substituted for that, to express
the cause of the firmness. But, if the author intended to say, that the
very partial discovery of the secret had not shaken the resolution,
the clause is then perfectly correct. According to the former
phraseology, the circumstance subjoined operated as a cause,
preventing the resolution from being shaken: according to the latter,
it had no effect, or produced no change of the previous
determination. In other words, “the less fixed that,” implies that the
subject of the following clause did not affect that of the preceding;
“the less fixed as” denotes, that the latter circumstance contributed
to the production of the former. As it is obvious, that, in such
examples, the definite article may refer either to the antecedent or
the subsequent clause, the distinction, here specified, should, for the
sake of perspicuity, be carefully observed[148].
“His donation was the more acceptable, that it was given without
solicitation.” That the word that is frequently used for because
cannot be questioned; thus, “I am glad that you have returned safe,”
that is, “because you have returned safe.”
“’T is not that I love you less
Than when before your feet I lay.”—Waller.
Here that is equivalent to because. English writers, however, after a
comparative, employ as or because, to denote that the circumstance
subjoined was the cause of the preceding one. The use of that in
such examples is accounted a Scotticism; it should, therefore, be,
“his donation was the more acceptable, as” or “because it was given
without solicitation.”
“His arguments on this occasion had, it may be presumed, the
greater weight, that he had never himself entered within the walls of
a playhouse.”—Stewart’s Life of Robertson.
“A mortification, the more severe, that the joint authority of the
archduke and the infanta governed the Austrian Netherlands.”—
Thomson’s Continuation of Watson’s History.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-37-320.jpg)
![A similar error occurs in the following sentence: “Adversity both
taught you to think and reason.”—Steele. The conjunction, which is,
in truth, the adjective both, is improperly placed. It should be,
“taught you both,” i.e. the two things, “to think and reason.”
It has been already observed, that the conjunction or is used
disjunctively, and subdisjunctively, sometimes denoting a diversity of
things, and sometimes merely a difference of names. Hence often
arises ambiguity, where the utmost precision of expression is
necessary[149]. When Ruddiman delivers it as a rule, that “verbal
adjectives, or such as signify an affection of the mind, require the
genitive,” I have known the scholar at a loss to understand, whether
there be two distinct classes of adjectives, here intended, or one
class under two designations. The ambiguity might here be avoided,
by using and or with instead of or. It may also be prevented in many
cases, by more forcibly marking the distinction by the use of either.
Thus, if we say, “whosoever shall cause, or occasion a disturbance,”
it may be doubtful, whether the latter of the two verbs be not
designed as explanatory of the former, they, though their meanings
be distinct, being often used as synonymous terms. If we say, “shall
either cause or occasion,” all doubt is removed. Sometimes
ambiguity may be precluded either by the insertion, or the omission,
of the article. Thus, if we say, “a peer, or lord of parliament,”[150]
meaning to designate only one individual, or one order, the
expression is correct. But if it be intended to signify two individuals,
every peer not being a lord of parliament, and every lord of
parliament not being a peer, we should say, “a peer, or a lord of
parliament,” or “either a peer, or lord of parliament.”
Having now endeavoured to explain and illustrate the etymology
and syntax of the English language, I cannot dismiss the subject
without earnestly recommending to the classical student to cultivate
a critical acquaintance with his native tongue. It is an egregious, but
common error, to imagine, that a perfect knowledge of Greek and
Latin precludes the necessity of studying the principles of English
grammar. The structure of the ancient, and that of modern](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-40-320.jpg)
![languages, are very dissimilar. Nay, the peculiar idioms of any
language, how like soever in its general principles to any other, must
be learned by study, and an attentive perusal of the best writers in
that language. Nor can any imputation be more reproachful to the
proficient in classical literature, than, with a critical knowledge of
Greek and Latin, which are now dead languages, to be superficially
acquainted with his native tongue, in which he must think, and
speak, and write.
The superiority of Greek and Latin over the English language in
respect of harmony, graceful dignity, conciseness, and fluency, will
be readily admitted. Our language is, comparatively, harsh and
abrupt. It possesses strength, indeed; but unaccompanied with
softness, with elegance, or with majesty. It must be granted also,
that the Greek is, perhaps, a more copious, and is certainly a more
ductile[151] and tractable language. But though, in these respects,
the English be inferior to the languages of Greece and Rome, yet in
preciseness of expression, diversity of sound, facility of
communication, and variety of phrase, it may claim the pre-
eminence. It would be easy to evince the truth of this assertion, did
the limits, which I have prescribed to myself permit. The fact is, that
analogous languages almost necessarily possess a superiority in
these respects over those, which are transpositive.
It is to be remembered, also, that our language is susceptible of
high improvement; and though its abrupt and rugged nature cannot
be entirely changed, much may be done to smooth its asperities and
soften its harshness.
As a further inducement to the study of the English language, I
would assure the young reader, that a due attention to accuracy of
diction is highly conducive to correctness of thought. For, as it is
generally true, that he, whose conceptions are clear, and who is
master of his subject, delivers his sentiments with ease and
perspicuity[152]; so it is equally certain, that, as language is not only
the vehicle of thought, but also an instrument of invention, if we](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-41-320.jpg)
![FOOTNOTES:
[1] Beattie seems to think that the antediluvians had an alphabet,
and that hieroglyphical was posterior to alphabetical writing. “The
wisdom and simple manners of the first men,” says he, “would
incline me to think, that they must have had an alphabet; for
hieroglyphic characters imply quaintness and witticism.” In this
reasoning I cannot concur. Alphabetic writing is indeed simple,
when known; so also are most inventions. But, simple and easy
as it appears to us, we have only to examine the art itself, to be
fully convinced, that science, genius, and industry, must have
been combined in inventing it. Nay, the learned author himself
acknowledges, “that though of easy acquisition to us, it is in itself
neither easy nor obvious.” He even admits, “that alphabetical
writing must be so remote from the conceptions of those who
never heard of it, that without divine aid it would seem to be
unsearchable and impossible.” I observe also that in passing from
picture-writing to hieroglyphical expression, and in transferring
the signs of physical to intellectual and invisible objects, fanciful
conceits would naturally take place. It is true also that the
manners of the antediluvians were simple; but it is not from
prudence nor simplicity of manners, but from human genius,
gradually improved, that we are to expect inventions, which
require the greatest efforts of the human mind.
[2] Cicero regards the invention of alphabetic writing as an
evidence of the celestial character of the soul; and many have
ascribed its origin to the inspiration of the Deity. To resort to
supernatural causes, to account for the production of any rare or
striking event, is repugnant to the principles of true philosophy.
And how wonderful soever the art of alphabetical writing may
appear, there can be no necessity for referring its introduction to
divine inspiration, if the inventive powers of man be not
demonstrably unequal to the task. Picture-writing is generally
believed to have been the earliest mode of recording events, or
communicating information by permanent signs. This was](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-43-320.jpg)
![probably succeeded by hieroglyphical characters. How these
pictures and hieroglyphical devices would, either through
negligence or a desire to abbreviate, gradually vary their form,
and lose their resemblance to the objects which they represented,
may be easily conceived. Hence that association, which existed
between the sign and the thing signified, being founded in
resemblance, would in process of time be entirely dissolved. This
having taken place, hieroglyphical characters would naturally be
converted into a mere verbal denotation, representative of words
and not of things. Hence, as Goguet, in his work, “De l’Origine
des Loix,” &c., reasonably conjectures, would arise by a partial
and easy analysis, a syllabic mode of denotation, which would
naturally introduce a literal alphabet. This conjecture must seem
highly probable, when it is considered, that both a verbal and
syllabic mode of notation are still practised by some Eastern
nations.
[3] I am aware, that in considering the letters y and w to be the
same with i and u (oo), I maintain an opinion, the truth of which
has been disputed. The reasons, however, which have been
assigned for rejecting it do not appear to me satisfactory.
[4] The mouth is not the proper organ for producing sound; but
merely the organ for modulating and articulating the specific
sounds.
[5] The sound of th in thin, is usually marked with a stroke
through the h, to distinguish it from its other sound; thus, tħick.
This distinction is by some writers reversed.
[6] Hutton’s Investigation of the Principles of Knowledge, vol. ii.
p. 688.
[7] Plato and Aristotle, when they treat of prepositions,
considered the noun and the verb as the only essential parts of
speech; these, without the aid of any other word, being capable
of forming a sentence. Hence they were called τὰ ἐμψυχότατα
μέρη τοῦ λόγου, “the most animated parts of speech.” The latter
of these philosophers, in his Poetics, admits four, adding to the
noun and the verb the article and the conjunction. The elder
Stoics made five, dividing the noun into proper and appellative.
[8]
Noun, Nomen de quo loquimur.
Verb, Verbum seu quod loquimur.—Quint. lib. i. 4.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-44-320.jpg)
![Horace has been thought by some to countenance this doctrine
when he says,
“Donec verba, quibus voces sensusque notarent,
Nominaque invenere.”—Lib. i. Sat. 3.
[9] The plural number, and the genitive singular, seem to have
been originally formed by adding er to the nominative singular, as
you, you-er, your; they, they-er, their; we, we-er, our. This
termination was afterwards changed into en, and then into es or
s. Thus we have still in provincial usage, though now almost
entirely obsolete, childer for the plural of child, and the double
plural in child-er-en, children, with the double genitive in west-er-
en, western.
[10] Brethren, in Scripture, is used for brothers.
[11] The obsolete plural occurs in the Bible. “These men were
bound in their hosen and hats.”—Dan. iii. 21.
[12] Baker inclines also to this usage in preference to the other;
but does not affirm it to be a plural noun.
[13] Much is sometimes joined with collective nouns; but these
denote number in the aggregate; thus, much company.
[14] The gender of mors, virtus, sol, θάνατος, ἀρετή, ἥλιος, was
unalterably fixed.
[15] It seems, however, to be more applicable to the English
language than to any other with which I am acquainted.
[16] These observations will sufficiently explain the reason why
we cannot concur with Dr. Johnson in thinking that there is “an
impropriety in the termination,” when we say of a woman, “She is
a philosopher.” The female termination in such examples is not
wanted; it would be pleonastic and improper. The meaning is,
“She is a person given to the study of nature.” If we had been
speaking of a lady devoted to philosophy, and had occasion
afterwards to mention her by an appellative, we should feel the
want of the appropriate termination; and instead of saying “the
philosopher,” we should wish, for the sake of discrimination, to be
able to say, “the philosophress,” or to employ some equally
distinctive term. In the example adduced by the learned
lexicographer, the female termination is superfluous; and would
intimate a distinction of philosophic character, instead of a
distinction of sex, the latter being denoted by the female
pronoun.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-45-320.jpg)
![[17] We remark, in some instances, a similar phraseology in
Greek and Latin. Θεὸς and θεὰ, deus and dea, are
contradistinguished as in English, god and goddess; the former of
each pair strictly denoting the male, and the latter the female.
But the former, we find, has a generical meaning, expressing “a
deity,” whether male or female; and is frequently used when the
female is designed, if divinity in the abstract be the primary idea
without regard to the sex, thus,
... “τὸν δ’ ἐξήρπαξ’ Ἀφροδίτη,
Ῥεῖα μάλ’ ὥστε θεός.”—Hom. Il. iii. 380.
Here the term θεός is applied to Venus, the character of divinity,
and not the distinction of sex, being the chief object of the poet’s
attention. Θεός is, therefore, to be considered as either masculine
or feminine.
“Ἀλλά μ’ ἁ Διός γ’ ἀλκίμα θεός.”—Soph. Aj. 401.
“Μήτε τις οὖν θήλεια θεός.”—Hom. Il. Θ. 7.
“Descendo, ac ducente deo, flammam inter et hostes
Expedior.”—Virg. Æn. ii. 632.
Here, also, deo is applied to Venus, as likewise in the following
passage, “deum esse indignam credidi.”—Plaut. Pœn. 2, l. 10.
[18] Πτῶσις γενική: general case. It has been supposed by some
that the Latins, mistaking the import of the Greek term, called
this the genitive case. See Ency. Brit., Art. Grammar.
[19] Amor Dei denotes either amor quo Deus amat, or quo Deus
amatur. Reformatio Lutheri, either qua reformavit, or qua
reformatus est. Injuria patris, desiderium amici, with many other
examples which might be produced, have either an active or
passive sense. ἡ ἀγαπὴ τοῦ Θεοῦ, יהוה אהבת, l’amore de Dio,
l’amour de Dieu, severally involve the same ambiguity with “the
love of God.”
[20] Of the six declensions, to one or other of which the learned
Dr. Hickes conceives the inflexion of almost all the Saxon nouns
may be reduced, three form their genitive in es, as, word,
wordes; smith, smithes. In the Mœsogothic, a kindred language,
the genitive ends in s, some nouns having is, some ns, and others
as, as, fan, fanins; faukagagja, faukagagjis.
[21] It must be obvious, that the terms general and universal
belong not to real existences, but are merely denominations, the](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-46-320.jpg)
![result of intellect, generalising a number of individuals under one
head.
[22] Non ut intelligere possit, sed ne omnino possit non intelligere
curandum.—Inst. lib. viii. cap. 4.
I am inclined to think that our language possesses a superiority in
this respect over the Greek itself. Ἐγένετο ἄνθρωπος
ἀπεσταλμένος παρὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ may signify either “man in the
species, or an individual, was sent from God.” The author of the
article Grammar, in the Encyc. Brit., observes, “that the word
ἄνθρωπος is here restricted to an individual by its concord with
the verb and the participle.” If he mean by this that the term
must be significant of only one individual, (and I can annex no
other interpretation to his words,) because a singular verb and
participle singular are joined with it, he errs egregiously.
Numberless examples might be produced to evince the contrary.
Job. v. 7. ἄνθρωπος γεννᾶται κόπῳ “man (mankind) is born unto
trouble;” where the subject is joined to a verb singular. Psal. xlix.
12. ἄνθρωπος ἐν τιμῇ ὢν οὐ συνῆκε, “man being in honour
abideth not.” Here also man for mankind is joined with a participle
and verb singular. And here it may be pertinently asked, would
not the term one for a in the first example somewhat alter the
meaning, and convey an idea different from that intended by the
evangelist?
[23] They are the Saxon words this or thes, “hic, hæc, hoc,” that
or thæt, “ille, illa, illud,” which were frequently used by the
Saxons for what we term the definite article, as, send us on thas
swyn, “send us into the swine.” Mark v. 21, tha eodon tha
unclænan gastas on tha swyn, “then the unclean spirits entered
into the swine.”
The Saxon definites are se, seo, thæt, for the three genders
severally; and tha in the plural, expressing the or those, as, thæt
goed sæd, the good seed. Thæt is also joined to masculine and
feminine nouns, as, thæt wif, the woman; thæt folc, the people.
Thæ (pronounced they) still obtains in Scotland, as, “thæ men”
for “these men.”
[24]
ץאר
ץהאר
.
[25]
האיש אשרי.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-47-320.jpg)
![[26] Horne Tooke appears to me to have erred in deriving odd
from ow’d. His words are these: “Odd is the participle ow’d. Thus,
when we are counting by couples or pairs, we say, ‘one pair,’ ‘two
pairs,’ &c., and ‘one ow’d,’ ‘two ow’d,’ to make up another pair. It
has the same meaning when we say, ‘an odd man,’ ‘an odd
action,’ it still relates to pairing; and we mean ‘without a fellow,’
‘unmatched.’” Now, I must own, this appears to me a very odd
explanation; for, in my apprehension, it leads to a conclusion the
very reverse of that which the author intends. The term odd is
applied to the one which stands by itself, and not to that which is
absent, or ow’d, to complete the pair. If I say, “there are three
pairs, and an odd one,” the word odd refers to the single one,
over and above the three pairs, and not to the one which is
wanting; yet Mr. Tooke refers it to the latter. His explanation
seems at once unnatural and absurd. Had he substituted,
according to his own etymology, add for and, saying, “three pairs,
add an ow’d one,” he must, I think, have perceived its inaccuracy.
It is the odd and present one, of which the singularity is
predicated, and not the absent or ow’d one.
[27] “Quivis seu quilibet affirmat; quisquam, quispiam, ullus, aut
negat aut interrogat,” are the words of an ancient grammarian. It
is observable also, that in Latin, ullus, any, is a diminutive from
unus, one; as any in English is from ane, the name of unity, as
formerly used.
[28] In Anglo-Saxon ic, in German ich, in Greek ἐγὼ, in Latin ego.
Mr. Webb delivered it as his opinion, that the pronoun of the first
person was derived from the Hebrew ech or ach, one, used by
apocope for achad or ahad, he added, “oned,” or “united.” It is
doubtless true, that ech occurs in one or two passages for one:
see Ezek. xviii. 10, and Ps. xlix. 8; in which latter passage it is
rendered in our translation, brother, and by R. Jonah, one; but
we apprehend that this fact will by no means justify his
conclusion. And as he considered that the pronoun of the first
person radically denoted one, he imagined that the pronoun of
the second person came from the numeral duo, du, tu, thu. Now,
it must be granted that there is an obvious resemblance between
ic and ech, and also between duo, tu, and thu; but were we to
draw any conclusion from this similarity, it would be the reverse
of that which the author has deduced. It seems quite
preposterous to suppose, that the necessity for expressing a
number would present itself, before that of discriminating
between the person speaking and the person addressed. The](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-48-320.jpg)
![rude savage could not converse with his fellow without some sign
of this distinction; and if visible signs (as is probable) would be
first adopted, we may reasonably presume, on several grounds,
that these would soon give place to audible expressions.
The pronoun ic is in Saxon declined thus:
Sing. Nom. Ic Gen. Min Dat. Me Acc. Me
Plur. Nom. We Gen. Ure Dat. Us Acc. Us.
[29] The pronoun of the second person is thus declined:
Sing. Nom. Thu Gen. Thin Dat. The Acc. The
Plur. Nom. Ge (hard) Gen. Eower Dat. and Acc. Eow.
[30] The Anglo-Saxon he is declined thus:
Sing. Nom. He Gen. His Dat. and Acc. Him.
[31]
Sing. Nom. Heo Gen. Hire Dat. Hire. Acc. Hi.
[32] This pronoun is from the Anglo-Saxon hyt or hit, “i” or “that.”
[33] In Anglo-Saxon hi, in Teutonic die.
[34] In Anglo-Saxon, hwa, hua; Gen. hwæs; Dat. hwam; Acc.
hwæne, hwone. Also hwilc, whence, says Hickes, proceeded
which, the letter l being elided.
[35] Mr. Tooke contends, that this part of speech is properly
termed adjective noun, and “that it is altogether as much the
name of a thing, as the noun substantive.” Names and
designations necessarily influence our conceptions of the things
which they represent. It is therefore desirable, that in every art or
science, not only should no term be employed which may convey
to the reader or hearer an incorrect conception of the thing
signified, but that every term should assist him in forming a just
idea of the object which it expresses. Now, I concur with Mr.
Tooke in thinking, that the adjective is by no means a necessary
part of speech. I agree with him also in opinion, that, in a certain
sense, all words are nouns or names. But, as this latter doctrine](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-49-320.jpg)
![From this view of the subject the reader will perceive that the
whole controversy depends on the meaning which we annex to
the term noun. If by this term we denote simply the thing itself,
without any accessary circumstance, then nothing can be called a
noun but the name in its simple form. If to the term noun we
assign a more extensive signification, as implying not only the
thing itself simply and absolutely, but also any accessary idea, as
conjunction, action, passion, and so forth, then it follows, that all
words may be termed names.
[36] The Saxons formed their comparative by er or ere, ar or
ære, er, or, ur, yr, and their superlative by ast, aste, est, ist, ost,
ust, yst. Now ar means before; hence the English words ere and
erst. Thus, in Saxon, riht wisere means “righteous before,” “just
before,” or “more than.” The suffix is equivalent to the Latin præ,
and the Hebrew preposition min, signifying also before; the only
difference being this, that what is a suffix to the Saxon adjective
is in Hebrew a prefix to the consequent subject of comparison,
and that in Latin the preposition following the positive stands
alone.
Mr. Bosworth, in his “Elements of Anglo-Saxon Grammar,” a work
displaying sound philological principles, has remarked, that the
Gothic superlative in itsa bears an obvious resemblance to some
of the Greek superlatives, as, ἄριστος, κάλλιστος, βράδιστος.
[37] Up and in are now used as adverbs and prepositions.
[38] This phraseology is Hebraistic—“more than all his children” is
the literal translation of the original, ְּמכל־בניו præ omnibus filiis,
seu, magis omnibus filiis suis.
[39] See a valuable little volume on English Grammar, by Mr.
Grant. The “Institutes of Latin Grammar,” by the same author, we
would recommend to the attention of every classical student.
[40] I, hi, hie, “to go,” he considers to be from Ἰ-έναι, the Greek
verb; and hence to be derived the Latin verb I-re, “to go,” “to
hie.”
[41] Intransitive verbs sometimes are used transitively, as, when
we say, “to walk the horse,” “to dance the child.” They also admit
a noun of their own signification, as, “to run a race.”
[42] Conformably to general opinion I here consider the English
language as having a passive voice. How far this opinion is well
founded shall be the subject of future inquiry.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-53-320.jpg)
![[43] Mr. Bosworth seems to think, that the word tense is derived
from the Latin tensus, “used to denote that extension or inflexion
of the word, by which difference in time is implied, or difference
in action is signified.” I am rather inclined to consider it as derived
from the French tems or temps, and that from tempus.
[44] “Some,” says Dr. Beattie, “will not allow anything to be a
tense, but what, in one inflected word, expresses an affirmation
with time; for, that those parts of the verb are not properly called
tenses, which assume that appearance, by means of auxiliary
words. At this rate, in English, we should have two tenses only,
the present and the past in the active verb, and in the passive no
tenses at all. But this is a needless nicety; and, if adopted, would
introduce confusion into the grammatical art. If amaveram be a
tense, why should not amatus fueram? If I heard be a tense, I
did hear, I have heard, and I shall hear, must be equally entitled
to that appellation.”
How simplicity can introduce confusion I am unable to
comprehend, unless we are to affirm that the introduction of
Greek and Latin names, to express nonentities in our language, is
necessary to illustrate the grammar, and simplify the study of the
language to the English scholar. But the author’s theory seems at
variance with itself. He admits, that “we have no cases in English,
except the addition of s in the genitive;” whence we may infer,
that he considers inflexion as essential to a case. Now, if those
only be cases, which are formed by inflexion, those only should,
grammatically, be deemed tenses, which are formed in the same
manner. When he asks, therefore, if amaveram be a tense, why
should not amatus fueram be a tense also? the answer on his
own principles is sufficiently obvious, namely, because the one is
formed by inflexion, the other by combination. And, I would ask,
if king’s be a genitive case, why, according to this theory, is not of
a king entitled to the same appellation? I apprehend the answer
he must give, consistently with his opinion respecting cases, will
sufficiently explain why amaveram, and I heard, are tenses, while
amatus fueram, and I had heard, are not.
Nay, further, if it be needless nicety to admit those only as tenses,
which are formed by inflexion, is it not equally a needless nicety
to admit those cases only, which are formed by varying the
termination? And if confusion be introduced by denying I had
heard to be a tense, why does not the learned author simplify the
doctrine of English nouns, by giving them six cases, a king, of a](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-54-320.jpg)
![language.” After this observation, argument surely becomes
unnecessary.
I have here, the reader will perceive, assailed the author’s
doctrine merely on the ground of inconsistency. It is liable,
however, to objections of a more serious nature; and were I not
apprehensive that I have already exhausted the patience of the
reader, I should now proceed to state these objections. There is
one observation, however, which I feel it necessary to make. The
author remarks, that to take the tenses as they are commonly
received, and endeavour to ascertain their nature and their
differences, “is a much more useful exercise, as well as a more
proper, for a work of this kind, than to raise, as might be easily
raised, new theories on the subject.” If the author by this intends
to insinuate that our doctrine is new, he errs egregiously. For
Wallis, one of the oldest, and certainly one of the best of our
English grammarians, duly attentive to the simplicity of that
language whose grammar he was exhibiting, assigned only two
tenses to the English verb. He says, Nos duo tantum habemus
tempora Præsens et Præteritum; and on this simple principle his
explanation of the verb proceeds. In the preface to his grammar,
he censures his few predecessors for violating the simplicity of
the English language, by the introduction of names and rules
foreign to the English idiom. Cur hujusmodi casuum, generum,
modorum, temporumque fictam et ineptam plane congeriem
introducamus citra omnem necessitatem, aut in ipsa lingua
fundamentum, nulla ratio suadet. And so little was he aware that
the introduction of technical names for things which have no
existence, facilitates the acquisition of any art or science, that he
affirms it in regard to the subject before us to be the cause of
great confusion and perplexity. Quæ (inutilia præcepta) a lingua
nostra sunt prorsus aliena, adeoque confusionem potius et
obscuritatem pariunt, quam explicationi inserviunt.
[45] Mr. Gilchrist, in his “Philosophic Etymology,” represents the
terminations ath, eth, ad, ed, et, en, an, as conjunctives,
equivalent to the sign +, denoting add, or join (see p. 162). In
another part of the same work, he considers did to be do
doubled, as dedi from the Latin do, which he believes to be the
very same word with our do. Repetition, he observes, is a mode
of expressing complete action. Hence we have do, do-ed, dede,
did, in English. This explanation is ingenious, and furnishes a
probable account of the origin of the word did, which he remarks
was formerly spelled dede.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-58-320.jpg)
![[46]
I be Thou beest He, she, or it be
We be Ye or you be They be,
from the Saxon
Ic beo Thu beest He beeth,
are obsolete, unless followed by a concessive term. Thus, instead
of saying, “Many there be that go in thereat,” we should now say,
“Many there are.” For “to whom all hearts be open,” we should
now write, “to whom all hearts are open.” We find them, however,
used with the conjunctions if and though; thus, “If this be my
notion of a great part of that high science, divinity, you will be so
civil as to imagine, I lay no mighty stress upon the rest.”—Pope.
That this was his notion the author had previously declared; the
introductory clause, therefore, is clearly affirmative, and is the
same as if he had said, “As this is my notion.” “Although she be
abundantly grateful to all her protectors, yet I observe your name
most often in her mouth.”—Swift. “The paper, although it be
written with spirit, yet would have scarce cleared a shilling.”—
Swift. In the two last sentences the meaning is affirmative;
nothing conditional or contingent being implied.
In the following examples, it expresses doubt or contingency. “If
thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down:” i.e. “shouldst be.” “If
I be in difficulty, I will ask your aid;” i.e. “If I should be.”
[47] Though the authority of Milton, Dryden, Pope, and Swift, can
be pleaded in favour of wert, as the second person singular of
this tense, I am inclined to agree with Lowth, that in conformity
to analogy, as well as the practice of the best ancient writers, it
would be better to confine wert to the imperfect conditional.
[48] If the expression of time with an attribute “be sufficient to
make a verb, the participle must be a verb too, because it
signifies time also. But the essence of a verb consisting in
predication, which is peculiar to it, and incommunicable to all
other parts of speech, and these infinitives never predicating,
they cannot be verbs. Again, the essence of a noun consisting in
its so subsisting in the understanding, as that it may be the
subject of predication, and these infinitives being all capable of so
subsisting, they must of necessity be nouns.”—R. Johnson’s
Gram. Comment.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-59-320.jpg)
![[49] The variety of form which this verb assumes, clearly shows
that it has proceeded from different sources.
Am is from the Anglo-Saxon eom, and is from the Anglo-Saxon ys
or is; and these have been supposed to have come from the
Greek εἰμὶ, εἶς.
The derivation of are is doubtful. It may, perhaps, have
proceeded directly from er or erum of the Icelandic verb,
denoting “to be.” By Mr. Gilchrist it is considered as “the same
with the infinitive termination are, ere, ire.” Mr. Webb conjectured,
that it might have some relation to the Greek ἔαρ, spring. Both
these explanations appear to us somewhat fanciful.
Art is from the Anglo-Saxon eart. “Thou eart,” thou art.
Was is evidently the Anglo-Saxon wæs; and wast, wert, probably
from the Franco-Theatisc, warst; and were from the Anglo-Saxon
wære, wæron.
Be is from the Anglo-Saxon Ic beo, I am, which, with the Gaelic
verb bi, to be, Mr. Webb considered to be derived from βίος, life,
as the Latin fui, from φύω, to grow. This conjecture he supports
by several pertinent quotations. See Mr. Bosworth’s “Elements of
Anglo-Saxon Grammar,” p. 164.
[50] The words did, hast, hath, has, had, shall, wilt, are evidently,
as Wallis observes, contracted for doed, haveth, haves, haved,
shall’st, will’st.
[51] This verb is derived from the Saxon magan, posse, the
present of which is Ic mæg, and the preterite Ic miht. Hence also
Ic mot.
“For as the fisshe, if it be drie,
Mote in defaute of water die.”—Gower.
[52] This verb is derived from cunnan, scire, posse, sapere.
Hence is derived the verb “to ken,” or “to know;” or more
probably, indeed, they were one and the same word: hence also
the word cunning. “To ken” is still used in Scotland; and in the
expression of Shakspeare, “I ken them from afar,” is erroneously
considered by some critics to mean, “I see them.”
[53] This verb is, unquestionably, a derivative from the Saxon
ꞅceal, I owe or I ought, and was originally of the same import. I
shall denoted “it is my duty,” and was precisely synonymous with
debeo in Latin. Chaucer says, “The faith I shall to God;” that is,
“the faith I owe to God.” “Thou shalt not kill,” or “thou oughtest](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-60-320.jpg)
![In addition to these directions for the use of shall and will, it is to
be observed, that, when the second and third persons are
represented as the subjects of their own expressions, or their
own thoughts, shall foretels, as in the first person, thus, “he says
he shall be a loser by this bargain:” “do you suppose you shall
go?” “He hoped he should recover,” and “he hoped he would
recover,” are expressions of different import. In the former, the
two pronouns necessarily refer to the same person; in the latter,
they do not.
[54] This verb is derived from the Saxon verb willan, velle, the
preterite of which is Ic wold.
[55] The preterite would is frequently employed, like the Latin
preterimperfect tense, to denote what is usual or customary.
Thus,
Quintilio si quid recitares, corrige, sodes,
Hoc, aiebat, et hoc; melius te posse negares,
Bis terque expertum frustra; delere jubebat,
Et malè tornatos incudi reddere versus:
Si defendere delictum quàm vertere, malles,
Nullum ultra verbum, aut operam insumebat inanem.
Horace.
where the verbs aiebat, jubebat, insumebat, may be translated,
“he would say,” “he would desire,” “he would spend.” Thus also in
English,
Pleas’d with my admiration, and the fire
His speech struck from me, the old man would shake
His years away, and act his young encounters:
Then having show’d his wounds, he’d sit him down.
[56] In Latin the imperfect potential is frequently employed in the
same manner to denote present time; thus, irem si vellem,
expresses present liberty and inclination. And the same analogy
obtains in Latin; for we say, either, tu, si hic sis, aliter sentias, or
tu, si hic esses, aliter sentires. In such examples, it is intended to
signify either the coexistence of two circumstances, or the one as
the immediate consequence of the other. An identity of tense,
therefore, best expresses contemporary events.
[57] If it should be said, that the participle may properly be
considered as a verb, since it implies an attribute with time, I
would ask, whether affirmation, the most important of all
circumstances, and without which no communication could take
place, should be overlooked in our classification of words](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-62-320.jpg)
![agreeably to their import, or the offices which they perform. If
the verb and participle be referred to one class, the principal part
of speech which has been pre-eminently distinguished by the
name of verb, or the word, is degraded from its rank, and
confounded with a species of words which are not even necessary
to the communication of thought. Surely, if any circumstance can
entitle any sort of words to a distinct reference, it is that of
affirmation.
If it should be objected that the participle, like the verb, governs
a case, I would ask, because lectio, tactio, and many other
substantives, are found sometimes joined with an accusative
case, were they ever on this account considered as verbs?
Besides, if the government of a case be urged as an argument,
what becomes of those participles which govern no case? Nay, if
the government of a case be deemed the criterion of a verb, what
name shall we assign to those verbs which have no regimen at
all? If any species of words is to be distinguished from another,
the characteristic difference must surely belong, not to part only,
but to the whole.
[58] The termination ing is from the Anglo-Saxon ande, ænde,
ende, ind, onde, unde, ynde, and corresponds to the termination
of the Latin gerunds in andum and endum, expressing
continuation, Amandum, Lufiande, Loving.
[59] Here I would be understood to reason on their own
principles; for the truth is, that each of these tenses admits a
definitive.
[60] See the Transactions of the Royal Irish Academy, vol. iii.
[61] Dr. Beattie observes, “that the fundamental error of those
philosophers who deny the existence of present time is, that they
suppose the present instant to have, like a geometrical point,
neither parts nor magnitude. But as nothing is, in respect of our
senses, a geometrical point, (for whatever we see or touch must
of necessity have magnitude,) so neither is the present, or any
other instant, wholly unextended.” His argument amounts to this,
that as a mathematical point is not an object of sense, nor has
any real existence, so neither has a metaphysical instant. It is
granted. They are each ideal. But does this prove the author’s
position, that philosophers have erred in asserting their similarity?
or does it evince that no analogy subsists between them? Quite
the reverse. The truth is, a geometrical point is purely ideal; it is
necessary to the truth of mathematical demonstration, that it be](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-63-320.jpg)
![conceived to have no parts. Finding it convenient to represent it
to sense, we therefore give it magnitude. A metaphysical instant,
or present time, is in like manner ideal; but we find it convenient
to assume as present an extended space. The doctor observes,
that sense perceives nothing but what is present. It is true; but it
should be remembered that not time, but objects which exist in
time, are perceived by the senses. It may enable a person to
form a correct idea of this matter, if he will ask himself, what he
means by present time. If it be the present hour, is it not obvious
that part of it is past, and part of it future? If it be the present
minute, it is equally clear, that the whole of it cannot be present
at once. Nay, if it be the present vibration of the pendulum, is it
not obvious that part of it is performed, and part of it remains to
be performed? Nor is it possible to stop in this investigation, till
present time, strictly speaking, be proved to have no existence.
Did it exist, it must be extended; and if extended, it cannot be
present, for past and future must necessarily be included in it. If
it should be answered, that this proves time, like matter, infinitely
divisible, and that the most tedious process will still leave
something capable of division, I reply, that as whatever may be
left in the one case must be figure, and not a point, so the
remainder, in the other, must be a portion of extended time, how
minute soever, and not an instant. The process, therefore, must
be continued, till we arrive in idea at a point and an instant,
incapable of division, being not made up of parts.
[62] When we say, God is good, I would ask Dr. Browne whether
the verb be definite or indefinite, whether it denote perfection or
imperfection, or have no reference to either. It appears to me that
neither of the terms is in his sense applicable; for that the verb
denotes simple affirmation with time; or, if applicable, that the
tense is, contrary to his opinion, indefinite, the idea of completion
or imperfection being entirely excluded.
[63] These phraseologies, as the author last quoted justly
observes, are harsh to the ear, and appear exceedingly awkward;
but a little attention will suffice to show that they correctly exhibit
the ideas implied by the tense which we have at present under
consideration.
[64] See Encyc. Brit., Art. Grammar.
[65] I consider that no language, grammatically examined, has
more cases, tenses, or moods, than are formed by inflexion. But
if any person be inclined to call these forms of expression by the](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-64-320.jpg)
![name of imperative mood, I have no objection. Only let him be
consistent, and call “Dost thou love?” an interrogative mood,
adopting also the precative, the requisitive, the optative, the
hortative, &c., together with the various cases in nouns, and
tenses in verbs, which are formed by prepositions and auxiliary
verbs: I should only apprehend, that language would fail him to
assign them names.
If it should be asked, “Agreeably to your doctrine of the verb, as
implying affirmation, what part of speech would you make the
verbs in the following sentences, Depart instantly, improve your
time, forgive us our sins? Will it be said that the verbs in these
phrases are assertions?” I should answer that all moods,
metaphysically considered, are, in my apprehension, equally
indicative. Every possible form of speech can do nothing but
express the sentiment of the speaker, his desire, his wish, his
sensation, his perception, his belief, &c. Whatever form,
therefore, the expression may assume, it must be resolvable into
assertion; and must be considered as expressing, in the person of
the speaker, what he desires, wishes, feels, thinks, and so forth.
No one surely will deny, that “thou oughtest not to kill,” “thou
shalt not kill,” “thou art forbidden to kill,” are affirmations. And
are not these expressions so nearly equivalent to “do not kill,”
that in Greek and Latin they are rendered indifferently either by
οὐ φονεύσεις, or, μὴ φόνευε; non occides, or ne occidito? If then
we say, “kill thou,” will it be contended that, though the
prohibition implies an affirmation of the speaker, the command
does not? The expression I conceive to be strictly equivalent to
“thou shalt kill,” “thou art ordered to kill.” Hence ave and jubeo te
avere, are deemed expressions of the same import. If the
question be examined grammatically, or as a subject of pure
grammar, I am inclined to think that where there is no variety of
termination, there cannot be established a diversity of mood.
[66] This verb is derived from the Saxon verb Ic most, ego
debeo.
[67] It belongs not to my province to inquire, how amarem came
to signify I might or could love, or whether it be strictly in the
potential or the subjunctive mood. I here take it for granted that
amarem does, without an ellipsis, signify, I might, could, would,
or should love, implying licet, possum, volo, debeo.—See
Johnson’s Comment.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-65-320.jpg)
![[68] Why this verb forms an exception, it would be easy to
explain.
[69] See Webster’s Dissertations, p. 263.
[70] A similar phraseology in the use of the pluperfect indicative
for the same tense subjunctive, obtains in Latin, as
“Impulerat ferro Argolicas fœdare latebras.”—Virgil.
[71] The Latins used si in both cases: and though their poets did
not attend to this distinction, their prose writers generally
observed it, by joining si for quoniam with the indicative mood.
[72] Where r is added, the verb follows also the general rule.
[73] Some have excluded bore as the preterite of this verb. We
have sufficient authority, however, for admitting it; thus,
“By marrying her who bore me.”—Dryden.
[74] Beholden is obsolescent in this sense.
[75] “So kept the diamond, and the rogue was bit.”—Pope.
“There was lately a young gentleman bit to the bone.”—Tatler.
[76] Brake seems now obsolescent.
[77] Though Johnson has not admitted the regular form of the
participle in this verb, I think there is sufficient authority for
concurring with Lowth in receiving builded as the participle as
well as built, though it be not in such general use.
[78] Chode, which occurs twice in the Bible, is now obsolete.
[79] Lowth has given clomb as the preterite of climb. I can find,
however, no authority later than Spenser, and am inclined to think
it is now obsolete.
[80] The irregular preterite clad is obsolescent.
[81] I know no example in which the preterite, which analogically
would be forwent, is to be found. It may be here remarked that
this verb, in violation of analogy, is generally spelled forego, as if
it meant “to go before.” This is equally improper as it would be to
write forebid, foresake, foreswear, for forbid, forsake, forswear.
[82] Fraught is more properly an adjective than participle.
[83] This verb, Lowth says, when employed as an active verb,
“may perhaps, most properly be used in the regular form.” Here
the learned author appears to me, if he be not chargeable with](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-66-320.jpg)
![error, to have expressed his meaning incorrectly; for it cannot be
disputed that the irregular form of this verb is frequently, and
with unquestionable propriety, used in an active sense. Thus we
say, “the servant hung the scales in the cellar;” and passively,
“the scales were hung by the servant.” I should, therefore, rather
say that, when this verb denotes suspension, for the purpose of
destroying life, the regular form is far preferable. Thus, “the man
was hanged,” not “hung.”
[84] The irregular preterite and participle of this verb are
employed in sea language; but the latter rarely.
[85] Lowth has given holpen as the participle; it is now
obsolescent, if not obsolete. It belonged to the verb to holp,
which has been long out of use.
[86] Several grammarians have rejected hid as a participle. It
rests, however, on unquestionable authority; but hidden is
preferable.
[87] Holden, which was some years ago obsolescent, is now
returning into more general use.
[88] Laden, like fraught, may be deemed an adjective.
[89] Priestley, I apprehend, has erred in giving lain as the
participle of this verb.
[90] Lien, though not so generally used as lain, is not destitute of
unexceptionable authority. I have, therefore, with Johnson and
Lowth, given it as the participle. Murray has omitted it.
[91] Some grammarians have rejected lit. It can plead, however,
colloquial usage in its favour, and even other authority. “I lit my
pipe with the paper.”—Addison.
[92] With Priestley and Lowth, I have given this verb a regular
participle; for which, I believe, there is sufficient authority,
without adducing the example of Shakspeare. Most other
grammarians have rejected it.
[93] Quitted is far more generally used as the preterite than quit.
[94] Priestley has rejected rid, and Murray ridden, as the
participle, while Johnson makes rid the preterite of ride. As rid is
the present and preterite of another verb, it would, perhaps, be
better to dismiss it entirely from the verb to ride, and conjugate,
with Priestley, ride, rode, ridden.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/9928-250623014239-6e389a18/85/Understanding-Management-8th-Edition-Daft-Solutions-Manual-67-320.jpg)
Understanding Management 8th Edition Daft Solutions Manual
- 1. Understanding Management 8th Edition Daft Solutions Manual download pdf http://testbankbell.com/product/understanding-management-8th-edition- daft-solutions-manual/ Visit testbankbell.com to explore and download the complete collection of test banks or solution manuals!
- 2. We have selected some products that you may be interested in Click the link to download now or visit testbankbell.com for more options!. Test Bank for Understanding Management, 8th Edition: Daft http://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-understanding- management-8th-edition-daft/ Management Daft 10th Edition Solutions Manual http://testbankbell.com/product/management-daft-10th-edition- solutions-manual/ Building Management Skills An Action-First Approach 1st Edition Daft Solutions Manual http://testbankbell.com/product/building-management-skills-an-action- first-approach-1st-edition-daft-solutions-manual/ Test Bank for Women’s Gynecologic Health, 2nd Edition, Kerri Durnell Schuiling, Frances E. Likis, ISBN-10: 0763756377, ISBN-13: 9780763756376 http://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-womens-gynecologic- health-2nd-edition-kerri-durnell-schuiling-frances-e-likis- isbn-10-0763756377-isbn-13-9780763756376/
- 3. Test Bank for Visual Anatomy and Physiology 3rd Edition Martini http://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-visual-anatomy-and- physiology-3rd-edition-martini/ Test Bank for E-Commerce 2019 Business, Technology and Society 15th by Laudon http://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-e- commerce-2019-business-technology-and-society-15th-by-laudon/ Solution Manual for South-Western Federal Taxation 2020: Corporations, Partnerships, Estates and Trusts, 43rd Edition, William A. Raabe http://testbankbell.com/product/solution-manual-for-south-western- federal-taxation-2020-corporations-partnerships-estates-and- trusts-43rd-edition-william-a-raabe/ Solution Manual for Calculus for Engineers, 4/E 4th Edition Donald Trim http://testbankbell.com/product/solution-manual-for-calculus-for- engineers-4-e-4th-edition-donald-trim/ Test Bank for Corporations, Partnerships, Estates and Trusts 2020, 43th by Raabe http://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-corporations- partnerships-estates-and-trusts-2020-43th-by-raabe/
- 4. Test Bank for Oral Pathology for the Dental Hygienist 7th Edition by Ibsen http://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-oral-pathology-for-the- dental-hygienist-7th-edition-by-ibsen/
- 5. The Environment and Corporate Culture 31 31 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. CHAPTER 2 THE ENVIRONMENT AND CORPORATE CULTURE CHAPTER OUTLINE Are You Ready to Be a Manager? I. The External Environment A. General Environment B. Task Environment II. The Organization–Environment Relationship A. Environmental Uncertainty B. Adapting to the Environment III. The Internal Environment: Corporate Culture A. Symbols B. Stories C. Heroes D. Slogans E. Ceremonies IV. Types of Culture A. Adaptability Culture B. Achievement Culture C. Involvement Culture D. Consistency Culture V. Shaping Corporate Culture for Innovative Response A. Managing the High-Performance Culture B. Cultural Leadership ANNOTATED LEARNING OBJECTIVES After studying this chapter, students should be able to: 1. Describe the general and task environments and the dimensions of each. The organizational environment consists of all elements existing outside the boundary of the organization that have the potential to affect and influence the organization. This environment consists of two layers: the task environment and the general environment.
- 6. The Environment and Corporate Culture 32 32 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. The task environment is closer to the organization and includes the sectors that conduct day-to- day transactions with the organization and directly influence its basic operations and
- 7. The Environment and Corporate Culture 33 33 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. performance such as competitors, suppliers, and customers. The general environment is the outer layer that is widely dispersed and affects the organization indirectly. It includes social, demographic, and economic factors that influence all organizations about equally. 2. Explain the strategies managers use to help organizations adapt to an uncertain or turbulent environment. The environment creates uncertainty for organization members. Uncertainty means that managers do not have sufficient information about environmental factors to understand and predict environmental needs and changes. Two basic factors that influence uncertainty are the number of factors that affect the organization and the extent to which those factors change. Strategies to adapt to these changes in the environment include boundary-spanning roles, interorganizational partnerships, and mergers or joint ventures. Boundary-spanning roles are assumed by people and/or departments that link and coordinate the organization with key elements in the external environment. Interorganizational partnerships are a popular strategy for adapting to the environment by reducing boundaries and increasing collaboration with other organizations. A merger is the combining of two or more organizations into one. A joint venture involves a strategic alliance or program by two or more organizations. 3. Define corporate culture and give organizational examples. Culture can be defined as the set of key values, beliefs, understandings, and norms shared by members of an organization. It can be analyzed at three levels. At the surface are visible items, which include manner of dress, patterns of behavior, physical symbols, organizational ceremonies, and office layout. At a deeper level are the expressed values and beliefs, which cannot be discerned from how people explain and justify what they do. These are values that members of the organization hold at a conscious level. They can be interpreted from the stories, language, and symbols organization members use to represent them. Some values become so deeply embedded in a culture that members are no longer consciously aware of them. These basic, underlying assumptions and beliefs are the essence of culture and subconsciously guide behavior and decisions. 4. Explain organizational symbols, stories, heroes, slogans, and ceremonies and their relationships to corporate culture. Fundamental values and corporate culture cannot be observed directly, but they can be understood through the visible manifestations of symbols, stories, heroes, slogans, and ceremonies. A symbol is an object, act, or event that conveys meaning to others. Symbols associated with corporate culture convey the organization’s important values. A story is a narrative based on true events that is repeated frequently and shared among organizational employees. Stories are told to new employees to keep the organization’s primary values alive. A hero is a figure who exemplifies the deeds, character, and attributes of a strong culture.
- 8. The Environment and Corporate Culture 34 34 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. Heroes are role models for employees to follow. A slogan is a phrase or sentence that succinctly expresses a key corporate value. Many companies use a slogan or saying to convey special meaning to employees. A ceremony is a planned activity that makes up a special event and is
- 9. The Environment and Corporate Culture 35 35 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. conducted for the benefit of an audience. Managers hold ceremonies to provide dramatic examples of company values. Organizational culture represents the values, understandings, and basic assumptions that employees share, and these values are signified by the above events. Managers help define important symbols, stories, heroes, slogans, and ceremonies to shape the future. 5. Describe four types of cultures and how corporate culture relates to the environment. The adaptability culture is characterized by values that support the company’s ability to rapidly detect, interpret, and translate signals from the environment into new behavior responses. This culture emerges in an environment that requires fast response and high-risk decision making. Employees have autonomy to make decisions and act freely to meet new needs, and responsiveness to customers is highly valued. The achievement culture is a results-oriented culture that values competitiveness, aggressiveness, personal initiative, and willingness to work long and hard to achieve results. It is suited to organizations concerned with serving specific customers in the external environment but without the intense need for flexibility and rapid change. An emphasis on winning and achieving specific ambitious goals is the glue that holds this organization together. The involvement culture places high value on meeting the needs of employees and values cooperation and equality. This culture has an internal focus on the involvement and participation of employees to rapidly meet changing needs from the environment. Managers emphasize values such as cooperation, consideration of both employees and customers, and avoiding status differences. The consistency culture values and rewards a methodical, rational, orderly way of doing things. This culture has an internal focus and a consistency orientation for a stable environment. Following the rules and being thrifty are important in this culture. The external environment exerts a big influence on internal corporate culture. Corporate culture should embody what it takes to succeed in the environment. If the external environment requires extraordinary customer service, the culture should encourage good service; if it calls for careful technical decision-making, cultural values should reinforce effective managerial decision making. 6. Define a cultural leader and explain the tools a cultural leader uses to create a high- performance culture. A cultural leader is a manager who uses signals and symbols to influence corporate culture. Cultural leaders influence culture by articulating a vision for the organizational culture that employees can believe in, and heeding the day-to-day activities that reinforce the cultural vision. To create a high-performance culture, a cultural leader would tie the central values that employees believe in to the need for high performance, and then make sure that work procedures
- 10. The Environment and Corporate Culture 36 36 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. and reward systems match and reinforce those values. Finally, the cultural leader must be sure to exemplify high-performance in his or her own work activities.
- 11. The Environment and Corporate Culture 37 37 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. LECTURE OUTLINE Are You Ready to Be a Manager? This questionnaire helps students determine in which types of organizations they might be most comfortable. INTRODUCTION A dominant market position is never guaranteed, even for a company like Blockbuster. Video rentals were a key aspect of home entertainment for many years and not very long ago Blockbuster was king of the market. However, mail-order and video-on-demand have completely changed the video rental market and Blockbuster no longer holds court. Although Blockbuster now offers mail-order and streaming services, it was too slow to respond to market changes and lost its influence in the market. The environment in which companies operate is continually changing, sometimes quite rapidly, as Blockbuster learned, and managers have to stay on their toes. For organizations in all industries, environments are increasingly dynamic, requiring managers to be prepared to respond quickly to even subtle environmental shifts. This chapter explains the components of the external environment and how they affect organizations. In addition, it examines a major part of the organization’s internal environment—corporate culture. I. THE EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT INSTRUCTOR’S NOTES
- 12. The Environment and Corporate Culture 38 38 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. The external organizational environment includes all elements existing outside the boundary of the organization that have the potential to affect the organization. The environment includes
- 13. The Environment and Corporate Culture 39 39 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. competitors, resources, technology, and economic conditions that influence the organization. It does not include those events so far removed from the organization that their impact is not perceived. The organizational environment can be conceptualized as having two layers surrounding the organization: the general environment and the task environment. The organization also has an internal environment that includes the elements within the organization’s boundaries. It is composed of current employees, management, and corporate culture. Business Blooper: British Petroleum Oil Spill After the worst oil spill in U.S. history, then-CEO of British Petroleum (BP) Tony Hayward didn’t win any friends on Capitol Hill two months later when he refused to provide details of the spill, and where he seemed non-chalant about the 760 “egregious willful” violations between 2007 and 2009 from OSHA. Two days later, he was off the coast of England watching his yacht in a race and spending time with his son, at the same time some 60,000 barrels of oil were still leaking each day in a disaster that had already cost 11 lives. This was just a year after the explosion of a BP refinery in Texas in which 15 were killed and hundreds wounded. Exhibit 2.1: Dimensions of the Organization’s General, Task, and Internal Environments A. General Environment 1. The general environment represents the outer layer of the environment and will influence the organization over time, but often is not involved in day-to-day operations. The dimensions of the general environment include international, technological, sociocultural, economic, legal-political, and natural. a. The international dimension represents events originating in foreign countries and opportunities for American companies in other countries. This dimension influences all other aspects of the external environment. This provides new competitors, customers, and suppliers and shapes social, technical, and economic trends. Today, every company has to compete on a global basis; high-quality, low-priced cars from Japan have changed the U.S. auto industry. Managers in the U.S. have been slow to understand issues and competition in foreign countries. b. The technological dimension includes scientific and technological advancements in a specific industry as well as society at large. Technology has created massive changes for organizations and industries. Today, computer networks, Internet access, videoconferencing, cell phones, and laptops are taken for granted. Other technology will affect organizations and managers; the decoding of the human genome could lead to revolutionary medical advances.
- 14. The Environment and Corporate Culture 40 40 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. Spotlight on Skills: Creating Guanxi in China With its low labor costs and huge potential market, China is luring thousands of U.S. companies in search of growth opportunities. However, only one-third of multinationals doing business in China have actually turned a profit. One reason Western businesses fall short of expectations is that they fail to grasp the centuries-old concept of guanxi that lies at the heart of Chinese culture. Guanxi is a supportive, mutually beneficial connection between two people that eventually grows into a network, and it is through these networks that business gets done. People doing business in China should remember the following things: business is always personal; don’t skip the small talk; relationships are not short-term, and; make contact frequently. c. The sociocultural dimension represents the demographic characteristics, norms, customs, and values of the general population. Important sociocultural characteristics are population and geographical distribution, population density, age, and education levels. Today’s demographic profiles are the foundation of tomorrow’s work force and customers. Forecasters see increased globalization of both consumer markets and labor supply with increasing diversity in organizations and consumer markets. d. The economic dimension represents the general economic health of the country or region in which the organization operates. Components of the economic dimension include consumer purchasing power, the unemployment rate, and interest rates. The frequency of mergers and acquisitions represents a recent trend in the economic environment, but there is vitality in the small business sector. Entrepreneurial start-ups are a significant aspect of the U.S. economy today. e. The legal-political dimension includes federal, state, and local government regulations and political activities designed to influence company behavior. Government regulations influence organizations through a variety of legislation such as Occupational Safety and Heath Administration (OSHA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), fair trade practices, and others. Pressure groups are interest groups that work within the legal-political framework to influence companies to behave in socially responsible ways. For example, tobacco companies are feeling the power of anti-smoking groups. f. The natural dimension includes all elements that occur naturally on earth, including plants, animals, rocks, and natural resources such as air, water, and climate. Protection of the natural environment is emerging as a critical policy focus around the world. The natural dimension is different from other sectors of the general environment because it has no voice of its own. Influence on managers to meet needs in the natural environment may come from other sectors, such as government regulation, consumer concerns, the media, competitors’ actions, and even employees.
- 15. The Environment and Corporate Culture 41 41 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. Discussion Question #5: Why do you think that many managers are surprised by environmental changes and hence are less able to help their organizations adapt?
- 16. The Environment and Corporate Culture 42 42 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. Exhibit 2.2: 2010 Environmental Performance Index B. Task Environment 1. The task environment is the layer closest to the organization and includes those sectors that have a direct working relationship with it. The task environment includes customers, competitors, suppliers, and the labor market. a. Customers are those people and organizations in the environment who acquire goods or services from the organization. Customers are important because they determine the organization’ success. Discussion Question #4: Contemporary best-selling management books often argue that customers are the most important element in the external environment. Do you agree? In what company situations might this statement be untrue? b. Competitors are organizations in the same industry or type of business that provide goods or services to the same set of customers. Specific competitive issues characterize each industry. The recording industry differs from the steel industry and the pharmaceutical industry. c. Suppliers are people and organizations that provide the raw materials that the organization uses to produce its output. Many companies are using fewer suppliers and building good relationships with them so that they will receive high- quality goods at lower prices. These companies are also finding that being cooperative, rather than adversarial, is the key to saving money, maintaining quality, and speeding products to market. d. The labor market represents people in the environment available for hire by the organization. Labor market factors that impact organizations include: the growing need for computer-literate information technology workers; the necessity for continuous investment in human resources through recruitment, education, and training to meet competitive demands of the borderless world; and the effects of international trading blocs, automation, and shifting plant location upon labor dislocations, creating unused labor pools in some areas and labor shortages in others. Discussion Question #2: Would the task environment for a cellular phone company contain the same elements as that for a government welfare agency? Discuss.
- 17. The Environment and Corporate Culture 43 43 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. II. THE ORGANIZATION-ENVIRONMENT RELATIONSHIP
- 18. The Environment and Corporate Culture 44 44 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. INSTRUCTOR’S NOTES Exhibit 2.3: The External Environment of Nortel Exhibit 2.4: The External Environment and Uncertainty A. Environmental Uncertainty 1. Environmental uncertainty must be managed to make the organization more effective. Uncertainty means managers do not have sufficient information about environmental factors to understand and predict environmental needs and changes. Environmental characteristics that influence uncertainty are the number of factors that affect the organization and the extent to which those factors change. 2. When external factors change rapidly, the organization experiences very high uncertainty (e.g., telecommunications firms, computer firms, and electronics firms). When an organization deals with a few external factors that are stable, managers experience low uncertainty (e.g., soft-drink bottlers or food processors). Discussion Question #3: What do you think are the most important forces in the external environment creating uncertainty for organizations today? Do the forces you identified typically arise in the task environment or the general environment? New Manager Self-Test: Are You Fit for Managerial Uncertainty?
- 19. The Environment and Corporate Culture 45 45 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. The questionnaire is designed to provide insight into whether a person is better suited for a stable environment or in an organization with an uncertain environment.
- 20. The Environment and Corporate Culture 46 46 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. B. Adapting to the Environment 1. Boundary spanning is an increasingly important task in organizations because environmental shifts can happen quickly in today’s world. Managers need good information about their competitors, customers, and other elements in the environment to make good decisions. The most successful companies involve everyone in boundary-spanning activities. Exhibit 2.5: The Shift to a Partnership Paradigm 2. Managers in partnering organizations are shifting from an adversarial orientation to a partnership orientation. Companies are joining together to become more effective and share scarce resources. Partners are frequently involved in one another’s product design and production, and they are committed for the long term. 3. Mergers and joint ventures also reduce uncertainty. A merger occurs when two or more organizations combine to become one. A joint venture involves a strategic alliance or program by two or more organizations that occurs when the project is too complex, expensive, or uncertain for one firm to handle alone. Discussion Question #6: Why are interorganizational partnerships so important for today’s companies? What elements in the current environment might contribute to either an increase or decrease in interorganizational collaboration? Discuss. III.THE INTERNAL ENVIRONMENT: CORPORATE CULTURE INSTRUCTOR’S NOTES
- 21. The Environment and Corporate Culture 47 47 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. Exhibit 2.5: Levels of Corporate Culture
- 22. The Environment and Corporate Culture 48 48 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. Spotlight on Skills: Zappos Shoes Zappos.com, an online retail site best known for its wide selection of shoes and its free shipping, boldly proclaims its unique culture in an offbeat set of ten core values, including “Create fun and a little weirdness.” CEO Tony Hsieh believes these core values illustrate the company’s innovative culture and demonstrate its ultimate business goal—cultivating happiness. Hsieh’s management theory is that if you create a work culture that fosters well-being, good practices and (eventually) good profits will naturally flow out of the operation. One way the Zappos Family of companies perpetuates its unique culture is by hiring employees who will fit into the slightly wacky, drama-club atmosphere. The internal environment includes: corporate culture, production technology, organization structure, and physical facilities. Corporate culture is extremely important in an organization attempting to achieve a competitive advantage. The internal culture must fit the needs of the external environment and company strategy. Culture is defined as the set of key values, beliefs, understandings, and norms shared by members of an organization. Culture is a pattern of shared values and assumptions about how things are done within the organization. It can be analyzed at two levels. At the surface level are visible artifacts—all the things one can see, hear, and observe by watching members of the organization. At a deeper level are the expressed values and beliefs, which are not observable but can be discerned from how people explain and justify what they do. Some values become so deeply embedded in a culture that members are no longer consciously aware of them. These basic, underlying assumptions and beliefs are the essence of culture and subconsciously guide behavior and decisions. A. Symbols 1. A symbol is an object, act, or event that conveys meaning to others. Symbols associated with corporate culture convey the organization’s important values. B. Stories 1. A story is a narrative based on true events that is repeated and shared among organizational employees. Stories are told to new employees to keep the organization’s primary values alive. C. Heroes 1. A hero is a figure who exemplifies the deeds, character, and attributes of a strong corporate culture. Heroes are role models for employees to follow.
- 23. The Environment and Corporate Culture 49 49 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. D. Slogans
- 24. The Environment and Corporate Culture 50 50 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. 1. A slogan is a phrase or sentence that succinctly expresses a key organizational value. E. Ceremonies 1. A ceremony is a planned affair that makes up a special event and is conducted for the benefit of an audience. Discussion Question #8: Cultural symbols are usually noticed through sight, sound, touch, and smell. For example, Abercrombie retail stores use music, attractive models, and fragrance to communicate elements of its retail store culture. Why are symbols important to a corporate culture? IV.TYPES OF CULTURE INSTRUCTOR’S NOTES The external environment has a major influence on internal organizational culture. The internal culture should embody what it takes to succeed in the environment. Exhibit 2.7: Four Types of Corporate Cultures A. The adaptability culture is characterized by values that support the company’s ability to rapidly detect, interpret, and translate signals from the environment into new behavior responses. This culture emerges in an environment that requires fast response and high- risk decision making. Employees have autonomy to make decisions and act freely to meet new needs, and responsiveness to customers is highly valued.
- 25. The Environment and Corporate Culture 51 51 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. B. The achievement culture is a results-oriented culture that values competitiveness, aggressiveness, personal initiative, and willingness to work long and hard to achieve results. It is suited to organizations concerned with serving specific customers in the
- 26. The Environment and Corporate Culture 52 52 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. external environment but without the intense need for flexibility and rapid change. An emphasis on winning and achieving specific ambitious goals is the glue that holds this organization together. C. The involvement culture places high value on meeting the needs of employees and values cooperation and equality. This culture has an internal focus on the involvement and participation of employees to rapidly meet changing needs from the environment. Managers emphasize values such as cooperation, consideration of both employees and customers, and avoiding status differences. D. The consistency culture values and rewards a methodical, rational, orderly way of doing things. This culture has an internal focus and a consistency orientation for a stable environment. Following the rules and being thrifty are important in this culture. Discussion Question #10: General Electric is famous for firing the lowest-performing 10 percent of its managers each year. With its strict no-layoff policy, Valero Energy believes people need to feel secure in their jobs to perform their best. Yet both are high-performing companies. How do you account for the success of such opposite philosophies? V. SHAPING CORPORATE CULTURE FOR INNOVATIVE RESPONSE INSTRUCTOR’S NOTES New Manager Self-Test: Culture Preference The fit between a new manager and organization can determine success and satisfaction. This exercise helps students better understand which type(s) of organizational culture they prefer. Research shows that one factor that increases a company’s value the most is people and how they are treated. Corporate culture has become increasingly important to managers as they recognize its importance in attracting, motivating, and keeping good employees. Culture plays a key role
- 27. The Environment and Corporate Culture 53 53 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. in creating an organizational climate that enables learning and innovative responses to threats from the external environment, challenging new opportunities, or organizational crises.
- 28. The Environment and Corporate Culture 54 54 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. Exhibit 2.8: Combining Culture and Performance A. Managing the High-Performance Culture 1. Companies that succeed in a turbulent world are those that pay attention to both cultural values and business performance. Cultural values can energize and motivate employees by appealing to higher ideals and unifying people around shared goals. Values boost performance by shaping and guiding employee behavior, so that everyone’s actions are aligned with strategic priorities. Four organizational outcomes are possible based on the relative attention managers pay to cultural values and business performance. a. Companies that pay little attention to either values or business results are unlikely to survive for long. b. Companies that focus on values but pay little attention to business results are likely to miss important environmental changes, eventually resulting in loss of market share. c. Companies that focus primarily on business results but pay little attention to organizational values will find it difficult to survive in times of crisis. d. Companies that emphasize both values and business performance will develop a strong organizational culture that gives employees a sense of identity, holds the company together during tough times, and helps it adapt quickly to a changing environment. These companies represent the high-performance culture that: is based on a solid organizational mission or purpose; embodies shared adaptive values that guide decisions and business practices; and encourages individual employee ownership of both bottom-line results and the organization’s cultural backbone. B. Cultural Leadership 1. One-way managers change norms and values to build a high-performance culture is through cultural leadership. A cultural leader defines and uses signals and symbols to influence corporate culture by: a. articulating a vision for the organizational culture that generates excitement and that employees can believe in; and b. heeding the day-to-day activities that reinforce the cultural vision.
- 29. The Environment and Corporate Culture 55 55 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. 2. Managers widely communicate the cultural values through words and actions. Value
- 30. The Environment and Corporate Culture 56 56 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. statements that aren’t reinforced by management behavior are meaningless. Cultural leaders also uphold their commitment to values during difficult times or crises. Maintaining consistency with the cultural values helps organizations weather the storm and come out stronger on the other side. Cultural leaders let everyone know what really counts. Benchmarking: Netflix Stock analyst Michael Pachter called Netflix a “worthless piece of cr**” in 2005 and said it would be taken over by Walmart, Amazon, and Blockbuster. Reed Hastings was bothered by having to pay a $40 late fee for one video and started to think people might join a DVD club the same way they might join a health club, with monthly fees. That’s how Netflix was born. At first, no one thought the idea of people renting movies through the mail had any merit, but when others started offering similar services, Hastings lowered costs, speeded up DVD turnaround, and improved the computer algorithm to make the experience more personal. The hard-driving, risk-taking culture Hastings developed at Netflix means he didn’t even balk at the prospect of cannibalizing the mail-order portion of his own business to introduce the movie-streaming side, and now Netflix is the market leader in streaming video content. Answers to Discussion Questions 1. How can you prepare yourself to become an effective manager in an increasingly uncertain global business environment? The range of things students could do is quite broad. Some specific things they could do inside the classroom include learning more about other countries and ethnic groups and their cultures, studying abroad, learning other languages, engaging in role plays that involve international settings, and interacting with students from other countries/cultures. Some ideas for things to do outside the classroom include visiting other countries, taking on internships in international organizations, hosting exchange students, and attending multicultural events in the community. 2. Would the task environment for a cellular phone company contain the same elements as that for a government welfare agency? Discuss. There are three components of the task environment: competitors, suppliers, and customers. An analysis of each of these components for the two organizations illustrates the differences in their task environments. Competitors for cellular phone companies include not only other cellular phone companies, but also traditional phone companies, broadband phone services, and other electronic communication services. It is debatable whether there are competitors for most government welfare agencies.
- 31. The Environment and Corporate Culture 57 57 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. Churches and other charitable organizations often provide similar services, but do not really compete with the agencies.
- 32. The Environment and Corporate Culture 58 58 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. Suppliers of cellular phone companies include the cell phone and other electronic device manufacturers, investors, and companies that build and operate cell phone towers. Suppliers of government agencies, in addition to material suppliers, are ultimately the taxpayers. Customers of cellular phone companies generally include businesses and members of the general public who are financially sound and able to afford the services offered by the cellular phone companies. Customers or clients of a government welfare agency are generally persons who are financially weak. 3. What do you think are the most important forces in the external environment creating uncertainty for organizations today? Do the forces you identified typically arise in the task environment or the general environment? The forces influencing the external environment are competitors, resources, technology, and economic conditions. The general environment forces include international, technological, sociocultural, economic, and legal-political dimensions. The task environment includes those sectors that have a direct working relationship with the organization, among them customers, competitors, suppliers, and the labor market. Organizations are challenged by uncertainty in the market place and must be able to respond quickly to changing conditions. These forces impact management and create uncertainty, especially in the general environment. A manager must be able to utilize a contingency approach to planning and control events and activities as they develop. 4. Contemporary best-selling management books often argue that customers are the most important element in the external environment. Do you agree? In what company situations might this statement be untrue? Companies in the public and private sector must be customer driven to remain competitive. Management and employees must be customer sensitive and custom deliver the right bundle of utilities to create optimal customer satisfaction. Every organization must have a customer focus and this should be reflected in the mission, goals, and strategies of every firm. 5. Why do you think that many managers are surprised by environmental changes and hence are less able to help their organizations adapt? Managers sometimes do not realize the need to carefully monitor the environment so that they can anticipate and prepare for changes, and there are also things that happen in the environment that cannot reasonably be predicted. By definition, uncertainty means that managers lack sufficient information about the environment to understand and predict needs and changes. Companies have to make an effort to adapt to the rapid changes in their environments. 6. Why are interorganizational partnerships so important for today’s companies? What elements in the current environment might contribute to either an increase or decrease in interorganizational collaboration? Discuss.
- 33. The Environment and Corporate Culture 59 59 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. Interorganizational partnerships are important for today’s companies to survive and grow in the future. Sharing information and resources is essential to cost effectiveness and satisfying
- 34. The Environment and Corporate Culture 60 60 Chapter 2 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part. stockholders of these organizations. Terrorist activities will add to the need for sharing of information among the interorganizational companies. Technological advancements will continue to increase the ease with which interorganizational collaboration occurs. 7. Many companies are “going green” or adopting environmentally friendly business strategies. Clorox, for example, now offers an eco-friendly household cleaner called Green Works. How do companies benefit from going green? As more of their customers become involved in recycling and other environmentally friendly projects and activities, companies benefit from going green in many ways. They can expand their product lines, as Clorox did, to take advantage of the growing market for eco-friendly products. They may be able to reduce costs by using more natural products, or increase revenues by selling previously discarded materials. Companies may also be able to create goodwill among consumers by presenting themselves as environmentally aware and concerned. 8. Cultural symbols are usually noticed through sight, sound, touch, and smell. For example, Abercrombie retail stores use music, attractive models, and fragrance to communicate elements of its retail store culture. Why are symbols important to a corporate culture? Symbols are important to corporate culture because they are tangible objects, acts, or events that embody deeper values shared by organization members. Astute managers create symbols to help reinforce key values. Almost anything can serve as a symbol. Thus, stories, heroes, slogans, and ceremonies all serve their own purpose, but also have symbolic value by indicating to employees the values and understandings that are especially significant for the organization. 9. Both China and India are rising economic powers. How might your approach to doing business with Communist China be different from your approach to doing business with India, the world’s most populous democracy? In which country would you expect to encounter the most rules? The most bureaucracy? China will have many more rules and much more bureaucracy than will India, as its government tries to strictly control the activities of foreign businesses, as well as those of its own citizens. Doing business in India will be considerably easier than in China due, in large measure, to the greater openness of its society and government. Additionally, there may be less risk of government interference or even takeover of company facilities and properties in India than there is in China. 10. General Electric is famous for firing the lowest-performing 10 percent of its managers each year. With its strict no-layoff policy, Valero Energy believes people need to feel secure in their jobs to perform their best. Yet both are high-performing companies. How do you account for the success of such opposite philosophies? The most likely answer to this question is that, while the companies have very different philosophies about the impact of employees’ sense of job security, both companies probably place strong emphasis on organizational values and business performance. Their views about
- 35. Exploring the Variety of Random Documents with Different Content
- 36. with the former. The pronoun us is very properly in the objective case, after the verb let; I and thou should therefore be in the same case, according to Rule vii. of Syntax. The expression is in fact elliptical, and when completed proceeds thus, “Let us make a covenant: let me and thee make.” “Though he were a son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered.” The first clause is intended to express a fact, not a hypothesis; the verb, therefore, should be in the indicative mood. Conjunctions have no government, either of cases or moods. IMPROPRIETY. “If in case he come, all will be well.” If and in case are synonymous, the one meaning “suppose,” and the other, “on the supposition.” One of them, therefore, is redundant. “The reason of my desiring to see you was, because I wanted to talk with you.” Because means “by reason;” the expression, therefore, is chargeable with redundancy. It should be, “that I wanted to talk with you.” “No sooner was the cry of the infant heard, but the old gentleman rushed into the room.”—Martinus Scrib. The comparative is here improperly followed by but, instead of than. “Scarce had the Spirit of Laws made its appearance, than it was attacked.” Than is employed after comparatives only, and the word other. It ought to be “scarce,” or, for reasons formerly given, “scarcely had the Spirit of Laws made its appearance, when it was attacked,” or “no sooner—than.” “The resolution was not the less fixed, that the secret was as yet communicated to very few, either in the French or English court.” This passage from Hume I have not been able to find. Priestley observes, that it involves a Gallicism, the word that being used instead of as. If the meaning intended be, that some circumstances, previously mentioned, had not shaken the resolution, because the secret was as yet known to few, then Priestley’s observation was
- 37. correct, and the word as should be substituted for that, to express the cause of the firmness. But, if the author intended to say, that the very partial discovery of the secret had not shaken the resolution, the clause is then perfectly correct. According to the former phraseology, the circumstance subjoined operated as a cause, preventing the resolution from being shaken: according to the latter, it had no effect, or produced no change of the previous determination. In other words, “the less fixed that,” implies that the subject of the following clause did not affect that of the preceding; “the less fixed as” denotes, that the latter circumstance contributed to the production of the former. As it is obvious, that, in such examples, the definite article may refer either to the antecedent or the subsequent clause, the distinction, here specified, should, for the sake of perspicuity, be carefully observed[148]. “His donation was the more acceptable, that it was given without solicitation.” That the word that is frequently used for because cannot be questioned; thus, “I am glad that you have returned safe,” that is, “because you have returned safe.” “’T is not that I love you less Than when before your feet I lay.”—Waller. Here that is equivalent to because. English writers, however, after a comparative, employ as or because, to denote that the circumstance subjoined was the cause of the preceding one. The use of that in such examples is accounted a Scotticism; it should, therefore, be, “his donation was the more acceptable, as” or “because it was given without solicitation.” “His arguments on this occasion had, it may be presumed, the greater weight, that he had never himself entered within the walls of a playhouse.”—Stewart’s Life of Robertson. “A mortification, the more severe, that the joint authority of the archduke and the infanta governed the Austrian Netherlands.”— Thomson’s Continuation of Watson’s History.
- 38. These sentences are chargeable with the same error; and, it is not a little remarkable, though the impropriety has been pointed out again and again, that there is scarcely a Scotch writer, not even among those of the highest name, who is not chargeable with the frequent commission of this error. “On the east and west sides, it (America) is washed by the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.”—Robertson. This mode of expression is incorrect; and, though to the geographer intelligible, it strictly conveys a conception not intended by the author. The copulative joins the two sides, which ought to be separated; and combines the two seas, instead of the two facts, implying, that both sides are washed by the same two oceans. It should be rather, “On the east side it is washed by the Atlantic, and on the west (is washed) by the Pacific ocean.” “Will it be believed, that the four Gospels are as old, or even older than tradition?”—Bolingbroke. Here there is a faulty omission of the particle corresponding to as; for the positive and comparative cannot be followed by the same conjunction. It ought to be, “as old as, or even older than tradition;” or, perhaps, better, “as old as tradition, or even older.” “The books were to have been sold as this day.” This is a most offensive vulgarism. The conjunction as can have no regimen; nor can it be properly used as equivalent to on. It ought to be, “sold this day,” or “on this day.” “It is supposed, that he must have arrived at Paris as yesterday.” This sentence is chargeable with the same error. Construed strictly, it is, “he must have arrived at Paris as, or in like manner as, he arrived yesterday.” “The duke had not behaved with that loyalty, as he ought to have done.” Propriety of correspondence here requires with that to be followed by with which, instead of as. The sentence, even thus corrected, would be still inelegant and clumsy. “The duke had not behaved with becoming loyalty,” would be much better.
- 39. “In the order as they lie in his preface.” This involves a similar impropriety. It should be, “in order as,” or “in the order, in which they lie in his preface.” “No; this is not always the case neither.”—Beattie. “Men come not to the knowledge of ideas which are thought innate, till they come to the use of reason; nor then neither.”—Locke. In old English two negatives denied; hence, perhaps, this phraseology originated. Johnson remarks, that the use of neither, after a negative, and at the end of a sentence, though not grammatical, renders the expression more emphatic. Analogy, however, is decidedly in favour of the affirmative term; I, therefore, prefer the word “either.” Were Johnson’s argument admitted, such expressions as these, “I forbade you not to go;” “I won’t suffer no such thing;” “He would not have none of my assistance,” might, I apprehend, be justified on the same principle. Those who employ them, doubtless, believe them to be more emphatic, than if they included a single negative. “This I am the rather disposed to do, that it will serve to illustrate the principles above laid down.”—Campbell on Rhetoric. This sentence involves an error, on which I have already animadverted. “The rather” should be followed by as, not that. “This is another use, that in my opinion contributes rather to make a man learned than wise: and is neither capable of pleasing the understanding, or imagination.” Lowth justly observes, that or is here improperly used for nor, the correlative words being neither, nor. In addition to this observation, I remark, that the word neither is erroneously placed. To render this collocation of the conjunction correct, there should be another attributive opposed to the word “capable,” as, “neither capable of pleasing the understanding, nor calculated to gratify the imagination.” But, as the author intended to exclude two subjects, these should have been contrasted by the exclusive conjunctions, thus, “is capable of pleasing neither the understanding, nor the imagination.”
- 40. A similar error occurs in the following sentence: “Adversity both taught you to think and reason.”—Steele. The conjunction, which is, in truth, the adjective both, is improperly placed. It should be, “taught you both,” i.e. the two things, “to think and reason.” It has been already observed, that the conjunction or is used disjunctively, and subdisjunctively, sometimes denoting a diversity of things, and sometimes merely a difference of names. Hence often arises ambiguity, where the utmost precision of expression is necessary[149]. When Ruddiman delivers it as a rule, that “verbal adjectives, or such as signify an affection of the mind, require the genitive,” I have known the scholar at a loss to understand, whether there be two distinct classes of adjectives, here intended, or one class under two designations. The ambiguity might here be avoided, by using and or with instead of or. It may also be prevented in many cases, by more forcibly marking the distinction by the use of either. Thus, if we say, “whosoever shall cause, or occasion a disturbance,” it may be doubtful, whether the latter of the two verbs be not designed as explanatory of the former, they, though their meanings be distinct, being often used as synonymous terms. If we say, “shall either cause or occasion,” all doubt is removed. Sometimes ambiguity may be precluded either by the insertion, or the omission, of the article. Thus, if we say, “a peer, or lord of parliament,”[150] meaning to designate only one individual, or one order, the expression is correct. But if it be intended to signify two individuals, every peer not being a lord of parliament, and every lord of parliament not being a peer, we should say, “a peer, or a lord of parliament,” or “either a peer, or lord of parliament.” Having now endeavoured to explain and illustrate the etymology and syntax of the English language, I cannot dismiss the subject without earnestly recommending to the classical student to cultivate a critical acquaintance with his native tongue. It is an egregious, but common error, to imagine, that a perfect knowledge of Greek and Latin precludes the necessity of studying the principles of English grammar. The structure of the ancient, and that of modern
- 41. languages, are very dissimilar. Nay, the peculiar idioms of any language, how like soever in its general principles to any other, must be learned by study, and an attentive perusal of the best writers in that language. Nor can any imputation be more reproachful to the proficient in classical literature, than, with a critical knowledge of Greek and Latin, which are now dead languages, to be superficially acquainted with his native tongue, in which he must think, and speak, and write. The superiority of Greek and Latin over the English language in respect of harmony, graceful dignity, conciseness, and fluency, will be readily admitted. Our language is, comparatively, harsh and abrupt. It possesses strength, indeed; but unaccompanied with softness, with elegance, or with majesty. It must be granted also, that the Greek is, perhaps, a more copious, and is certainly a more ductile[151] and tractable language. But though, in these respects, the English be inferior to the languages of Greece and Rome, yet in preciseness of expression, diversity of sound, facility of communication, and variety of phrase, it may claim the pre- eminence. It would be easy to evince the truth of this assertion, did the limits, which I have prescribed to myself permit. The fact is, that analogous languages almost necessarily possess a superiority in these respects over those, which are transpositive. It is to be remembered, also, that our language is susceptible of high improvement; and though its abrupt and rugged nature cannot be entirely changed, much may be done to smooth its asperities and soften its harshness. As a further inducement to the study of the English language, I would assure the young reader, that a due attention to accuracy of diction is highly conducive to correctness of thought. For, as it is generally true, that he, whose conceptions are clear, and who is master of his subject, delivers his sentiments with ease and perspicuity[152]; so it is equally certain, that, as language is not only the vehicle of thought, but also an instrument of invention, if we
- 42. desire to attain a habit of conceiving clearly and thinking correctly, we must learn to speak and write with accuracy and precision. It must, at the same time, be remembered, that to give our chief attention to mere phraseology, or to be more solicitous about the accuracy of the diction than the value of the sentiment, is a sure indication of a nerveless and vacant mind. As we estimate a man, not by his garb, but by his intellectual and moral worth, so it is the sentiment itself, not the dress in which it is exhibited, that determines its character, and our opinion of its author. “True expression, like th’ unchanging sun, Clears and improves whate’er it shines upon; It gilds all objects, but it alters none.”—Pope. In short, the precept of Quintilian should be studiously observed: “curam ergo verborum, rerum volo esse solicitudinem.”—Inst. Orat. lib. viii. THE END. G. Woodfall and Son, Printers, Angel Court, Skinner Street, London.
- 43. FOOTNOTES: [1] Beattie seems to think that the antediluvians had an alphabet, and that hieroglyphical was posterior to alphabetical writing. “The wisdom and simple manners of the first men,” says he, “would incline me to think, that they must have had an alphabet; for hieroglyphic characters imply quaintness and witticism.” In this reasoning I cannot concur. Alphabetic writing is indeed simple, when known; so also are most inventions. But, simple and easy as it appears to us, we have only to examine the art itself, to be fully convinced, that science, genius, and industry, must have been combined in inventing it. Nay, the learned author himself acknowledges, “that though of easy acquisition to us, it is in itself neither easy nor obvious.” He even admits, “that alphabetical writing must be so remote from the conceptions of those who never heard of it, that without divine aid it would seem to be unsearchable and impossible.” I observe also that in passing from picture-writing to hieroglyphical expression, and in transferring the signs of physical to intellectual and invisible objects, fanciful conceits would naturally take place. It is true also that the manners of the antediluvians were simple; but it is not from prudence nor simplicity of manners, but from human genius, gradually improved, that we are to expect inventions, which require the greatest efforts of the human mind. [2] Cicero regards the invention of alphabetic writing as an evidence of the celestial character of the soul; and many have ascribed its origin to the inspiration of the Deity. To resort to supernatural causes, to account for the production of any rare or striking event, is repugnant to the principles of true philosophy. And how wonderful soever the art of alphabetical writing may appear, there can be no necessity for referring its introduction to divine inspiration, if the inventive powers of man be not demonstrably unequal to the task. Picture-writing is generally believed to have been the earliest mode of recording events, or communicating information by permanent signs. This was
- 44. probably succeeded by hieroglyphical characters. How these pictures and hieroglyphical devices would, either through negligence or a desire to abbreviate, gradually vary their form, and lose their resemblance to the objects which they represented, may be easily conceived. Hence that association, which existed between the sign and the thing signified, being founded in resemblance, would in process of time be entirely dissolved. This having taken place, hieroglyphical characters would naturally be converted into a mere verbal denotation, representative of words and not of things. Hence, as Goguet, in his work, “De l’Origine des Loix,” &c., reasonably conjectures, would arise by a partial and easy analysis, a syllabic mode of denotation, which would naturally introduce a literal alphabet. This conjecture must seem highly probable, when it is considered, that both a verbal and syllabic mode of notation are still practised by some Eastern nations. [3] I am aware, that in considering the letters y and w to be the same with i and u (oo), I maintain an opinion, the truth of which has been disputed. The reasons, however, which have been assigned for rejecting it do not appear to me satisfactory. [4] The mouth is not the proper organ for producing sound; but merely the organ for modulating and articulating the specific sounds. [5] The sound of th in thin, is usually marked with a stroke through the h, to distinguish it from its other sound; thus, tħick. This distinction is by some writers reversed. [6] Hutton’s Investigation of the Principles of Knowledge, vol. ii. p. 688. [7] Plato and Aristotle, when they treat of prepositions, considered the noun and the verb as the only essential parts of speech; these, without the aid of any other word, being capable of forming a sentence. Hence they were called τὰ ἐμψυχότατα μέρη τοῦ λόγου, “the most animated parts of speech.” The latter of these philosophers, in his Poetics, admits four, adding to the noun and the verb the article and the conjunction. The elder Stoics made five, dividing the noun into proper and appellative. [8] Noun, Nomen de quo loquimur. Verb, Verbum seu quod loquimur.—Quint. lib. i. 4.
- 45. Horace has been thought by some to countenance this doctrine when he says, “Donec verba, quibus voces sensusque notarent, Nominaque invenere.”—Lib. i. Sat. 3. [9] The plural number, and the genitive singular, seem to have been originally formed by adding er to the nominative singular, as you, you-er, your; they, they-er, their; we, we-er, our. This termination was afterwards changed into en, and then into es or s. Thus we have still in provincial usage, though now almost entirely obsolete, childer for the plural of child, and the double plural in child-er-en, children, with the double genitive in west-er- en, western. [10] Brethren, in Scripture, is used for brothers. [11] The obsolete plural occurs in the Bible. “These men were bound in their hosen and hats.”—Dan. iii. 21. [12] Baker inclines also to this usage in preference to the other; but does not affirm it to be a plural noun. [13] Much is sometimes joined with collective nouns; but these denote number in the aggregate; thus, much company. [14] The gender of mors, virtus, sol, θάνατος, ἀρετή, ἥλιος, was unalterably fixed. [15] It seems, however, to be more applicable to the English language than to any other with which I am acquainted. [16] These observations will sufficiently explain the reason why we cannot concur with Dr. Johnson in thinking that there is “an impropriety in the termination,” when we say of a woman, “She is a philosopher.” The female termination in such examples is not wanted; it would be pleonastic and improper. The meaning is, “She is a person given to the study of nature.” If we had been speaking of a lady devoted to philosophy, and had occasion afterwards to mention her by an appellative, we should feel the want of the appropriate termination; and instead of saying “the philosopher,” we should wish, for the sake of discrimination, to be able to say, “the philosophress,” or to employ some equally distinctive term. In the example adduced by the learned lexicographer, the female termination is superfluous; and would intimate a distinction of philosophic character, instead of a distinction of sex, the latter being denoted by the female pronoun.
- 46. [17] We remark, in some instances, a similar phraseology in Greek and Latin. Θεὸς and θεὰ, deus and dea, are contradistinguished as in English, god and goddess; the former of each pair strictly denoting the male, and the latter the female. But the former, we find, has a generical meaning, expressing “a deity,” whether male or female; and is frequently used when the female is designed, if divinity in the abstract be the primary idea without regard to the sex, thus, ... “τὸν δ’ ἐξήρπαξ’ Ἀφροδίτη, Ῥεῖα μάλ’ ὥστε θεός.”—Hom. Il. iii. 380. Here the term θεός is applied to Venus, the character of divinity, and not the distinction of sex, being the chief object of the poet’s attention. Θεός is, therefore, to be considered as either masculine or feminine. “Ἀλλά μ’ ἁ Διός γ’ ἀλκίμα θεός.”—Soph. Aj. 401. “Μήτε τις οὖν θήλεια θεός.”—Hom. Il. Θ. 7. “Descendo, ac ducente deo, flammam inter et hostes Expedior.”—Virg. Æn. ii. 632. Here, also, deo is applied to Venus, as likewise in the following passage, “deum esse indignam credidi.”—Plaut. Pœn. 2, l. 10. [18] Πτῶσις γενική: general case. It has been supposed by some that the Latins, mistaking the import of the Greek term, called this the genitive case. See Ency. Brit., Art. Grammar. [19] Amor Dei denotes either amor quo Deus amat, or quo Deus amatur. Reformatio Lutheri, either qua reformavit, or qua reformatus est. Injuria patris, desiderium amici, with many other examples which might be produced, have either an active or passive sense. ἡ ἀγαπὴ τοῦ Θεοῦ, יהוה אהבת, l’amore de Dio, l’amour de Dieu, severally involve the same ambiguity with “the love of God.” [20] Of the six declensions, to one or other of which the learned Dr. Hickes conceives the inflexion of almost all the Saxon nouns may be reduced, three form their genitive in es, as, word, wordes; smith, smithes. In the Mœsogothic, a kindred language, the genitive ends in s, some nouns having is, some ns, and others as, as, fan, fanins; faukagagja, faukagagjis. [21] It must be obvious, that the terms general and universal belong not to real existences, but are merely denominations, the
- 47. result of intellect, generalising a number of individuals under one head. [22] Non ut intelligere possit, sed ne omnino possit non intelligere curandum.—Inst. lib. viii. cap. 4. I am inclined to think that our language possesses a superiority in this respect over the Greek itself. Ἐγένετο ἄνθρωπος ἀπεσταλμένος παρὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ may signify either “man in the species, or an individual, was sent from God.” The author of the article Grammar, in the Encyc. Brit., observes, “that the word ἄνθρωπος is here restricted to an individual by its concord with the verb and the participle.” If he mean by this that the term must be significant of only one individual, (and I can annex no other interpretation to his words,) because a singular verb and participle singular are joined with it, he errs egregiously. Numberless examples might be produced to evince the contrary. Job. v. 7. ἄνθρωπος γεννᾶται κόπῳ “man (mankind) is born unto trouble;” where the subject is joined to a verb singular. Psal. xlix. 12. ἄνθρωπος ἐν τιμῇ ὢν οὐ συνῆκε, “man being in honour abideth not.” Here also man for mankind is joined with a participle and verb singular. And here it may be pertinently asked, would not the term one for a in the first example somewhat alter the meaning, and convey an idea different from that intended by the evangelist? [23] They are the Saxon words this or thes, “hic, hæc, hoc,” that or thæt, “ille, illa, illud,” which were frequently used by the Saxons for what we term the definite article, as, send us on thas swyn, “send us into the swine.” Mark v. 21, tha eodon tha unclænan gastas on tha swyn, “then the unclean spirits entered into the swine.” The Saxon definites are se, seo, thæt, for the three genders severally; and tha in the plural, expressing the or those, as, thæt goed sæd, the good seed. Thæt is also joined to masculine and feminine nouns, as, thæt wif, the woman; thæt folc, the people. Thæ (pronounced they) still obtains in Scotland, as, “thæ men” for “these men.” [24] ץאר ץהאר . [25] האיש אשרי.
- 48. [26] Horne Tooke appears to me to have erred in deriving odd from ow’d. His words are these: “Odd is the participle ow’d. Thus, when we are counting by couples or pairs, we say, ‘one pair,’ ‘two pairs,’ &c., and ‘one ow’d,’ ‘two ow’d,’ to make up another pair. It has the same meaning when we say, ‘an odd man,’ ‘an odd action,’ it still relates to pairing; and we mean ‘without a fellow,’ ‘unmatched.’” Now, I must own, this appears to me a very odd explanation; for, in my apprehension, it leads to a conclusion the very reverse of that which the author intends. The term odd is applied to the one which stands by itself, and not to that which is absent, or ow’d, to complete the pair. If I say, “there are three pairs, and an odd one,” the word odd refers to the single one, over and above the three pairs, and not to the one which is wanting; yet Mr. Tooke refers it to the latter. His explanation seems at once unnatural and absurd. Had he substituted, according to his own etymology, add for and, saying, “three pairs, add an ow’d one,” he must, I think, have perceived its inaccuracy. It is the odd and present one, of which the singularity is predicated, and not the absent or ow’d one. [27] “Quivis seu quilibet affirmat; quisquam, quispiam, ullus, aut negat aut interrogat,” are the words of an ancient grammarian. It is observable also, that in Latin, ullus, any, is a diminutive from unus, one; as any in English is from ane, the name of unity, as formerly used. [28] In Anglo-Saxon ic, in German ich, in Greek ἐγὼ, in Latin ego. Mr. Webb delivered it as his opinion, that the pronoun of the first person was derived from the Hebrew ech or ach, one, used by apocope for achad or ahad, he added, “oned,” or “united.” It is doubtless true, that ech occurs in one or two passages for one: see Ezek. xviii. 10, and Ps. xlix. 8; in which latter passage it is rendered in our translation, brother, and by R. Jonah, one; but we apprehend that this fact will by no means justify his conclusion. And as he considered that the pronoun of the first person radically denoted one, he imagined that the pronoun of the second person came from the numeral duo, du, tu, thu. Now, it must be granted that there is an obvious resemblance between ic and ech, and also between duo, tu, and thu; but were we to draw any conclusion from this similarity, it would be the reverse of that which the author has deduced. It seems quite preposterous to suppose, that the necessity for expressing a number would present itself, before that of discriminating between the person speaking and the person addressed. The
- 49. rude savage could not converse with his fellow without some sign of this distinction; and if visible signs (as is probable) would be first adopted, we may reasonably presume, on several grounds, that these would soon give place to audible expressions. The pronoun ic is in Saxon declined thus: Sing. Nom. Ic Gen. Min Dat. Me Acc. Me Plur. Nom. We Gen. Ure Dat. Us Acc. Us. [29] The pronoun of the second person is thus declined: Sing. Nom. Thu Gen. Thin Dat. The Acc. The Plur. Nom. Ge (hard) Gen. Eower Dat. and Acc. Eow. [30] The Anglo-Saxon he is declined thus: Sing. Nom. He Gen. His Dat. and Acc. Him. [31] Sing. Nom. Heo Gen. Hire Dat. Hire. Acc. Hi. [32] This pronoun is from the Anglo-Saxon hyt or hit, “i” or “that.” [33] In Anglo-Saxon hi, in Teutonic die. [34] In Anglo-Saxon, hwa, hua; Gen. hwæs; Dat. hwam; Acc. hwæne, hwone. Also hwilc, whence, says Hickes, proceeded which, the letter l being elided. [35] Mr. Tooke contends, that this part of speech is properly termed adjective noun, and “that it is altogether as much the name of a thing, as the noun substantive.” Names and designations necessarily influence our conceptions of the things which they represent. It is therefore desirable, that in every art or science, not only should no term be employed which may convey to the reader or hearer an incorrect conception of the thing signified, but that every term should assist him in forming a just idea of the object which it expresses. Now, I concur with Mr. Tooke in thinking, that the adjective is by no means a necessary part of speech. I agree with him also in opinion, that, in a certain sense, all words are nouns or names. But, as this latter doctrine
- 50. seems directly repugnant to the concurrent theories of critics and grammarians, it is necessary to explain in what sense the opinion of Mr. Tooke requires to be understood; and in presenting the reader with this explanation, I shall briefly state the objections which will naturally offer themselves against the justness of this theory. “Gold, and brass, and silk, is each of them,” says Mr. Tooke, “the name of a thing, and denotes a substance. If, then, I say, a gold-ring, a brass-tube, a silk-string; here are the substantives adjectivè posita, yet names of things, and denoting substances.” It may be contended, however, that these are not substantives, but adjectives, and are the same as golden, brazen, silken. He proceeds: “If again I say, a golden ring, a brazen tube, a silken string; do gold, and brass, and silk, cease to be the names of things, and cease to denote substances, because instead of coupling them with ring, tube, and string, by a hyphen thus (-), I couple them to the same words, by adding the termination en?” It may be answered, they do not cease to imply the substances, but they are no longer names of those substances. Hard implies hardness, but it is not the name of that quality. Atheniensis implies Athenæ, but it is not the name of the city, any more than belonging to Athens can be called its name. He observes: “If it were true, that adjectives were not the names of things, there could be no attribution by adjectives; for you cannot attribute nothing.” This conclusion may be disputed. An adjective may imply a substance, quality, or property, though it is not the name of it. Cereus, “waxen,” implies cera, “wax;” but it is the latter only which is strictly the name of the substance. Pertaining to wax, made of wax, are not surely names of the thing itself. Every attributive, whether verb or adjective, must imply an attribute; but it is not therefore the name of that attribute. Juvenescit, “he waxes young,” expresses an attribute; but we should not call juvenescit the name of the attribute. It may be asked, what is the difference between caput hominis, “a man’s head,” and caput humanum, “a human head?” If hominis, “man’s,” be deemed a noun, why should not humanum, “human,” be deemed a noun also? It may be answered, that hominis does, in fact, perform the office of an adjective, expressing not only the individual, but conjunction also; and that Mr. Wallis assigns to the English genitive the name of adjective. Besides, does not Mr. Tooke himself maintain, “that case, gender, and number, are no parts of the noun”? and does it not hence follow, that the real nouns are not hominis, but homo,—not
- 51. man’s, but man? for such certainly is their form when divested of those circumstances which, according to Mr. Tooke, make no part of them. If the doctrine, therefore, of the learned author be correct, and if the real noun exclude gender, case, and number, as any part of it, neither hominis nor humanum, man’s nor human, can with consistency be called nouns. But let Mr. Tooke’s argument be applied to the verb, the τὸ ῥῆμα, which he justly considers as an essential part of speech. “If verbs were not the names of things, there could be no attribution by verbs, for we cannot attribute nothing.” Are we then to call sapit, vivit, legit, names? If so, we have nothing but names; and to this conclusion Mr. Tooke fairly brings the discussion; for he says, that all words are names. Having thus submitted to the reader the doctrine of this sagacious critic, with the objections which naturally present themselves, I proceed to observe, that the controversy appears to me to be, in a great degree, a mere verbal dispute. It is agreed on both sides, that the adjective expresses a substance, quality, or property; but, while it is affirmed by some critics, it is denied by others, that it is the name of the thing signified. The metaphysician considers words merely as signs of thought, while the grammarian regards chiefly their changes by inflexion: and hence arises that perplexity in which the classification of words has been, and still continues to be, involved. Now, it is evident that every word must be the sign of some sensation, idea, or perception. It must express some substance or some attribute: and in this sense all words may be regarded as names. Sometimes we have the name of the thing simply, as person. Sometimes we have an accessary idea combined with the simple sign, as “possession,” “conjunction,” “action,” and so forth, as personal, personally, personify. This accessary circumstance, we have reason to believe, was originally denoted by a distinct word, significant of the idea intended; and that this word was, in the progress of language, abbreviated and incorporated with the primary term, in the form of what we now term an affix or prefix. Thus frigus, frigidus, friget, all denote the same primary idea, involving the name of that quality, or of that sensation, which we term cold. Frigus is the name of the thing simply; frigidus expresses the quality in concreto, or conjunction. Considering, therefore, all words as names, it may be regarded as a complex name, expressing two distinct ideas,—that of the quality, and that of conjunction. Friget (the subject being understood) may be
- 52. regarded as a name still more complex; involving, first, the name of the quality; secondly, the name of conjunction; thirdly, the sign of affirmation, as either expressed by an appropriate name, or constructively implied, equivalent to the three words, est cum frigore. According, then, to this metaphysical view of the subject, we have first nomen simplex, the simple name; secondly, nomen adjectivum or nomen duplex, the name of the thing, with that of conjunction; thirdly, nomen affirmativum, the name of the thing affirmed to be conjoined. The simple question now is, whether all words, not even the verb excepted, should be called nouns; or whether we shall assign them such appellations as may indicate the leading circumstances by which they are distinguished. The latter appears to me to be the only mode which the grammarian, as the teacher of an art, can successfully adopt. Considering the subject in this light, I am inclined to say with Mr. Harris, that the adjective, as implying some substance or attribute, not per se, but in conjunction, or as pertaining, is more nearly allied to the verb than to the noun; and that though the verb and the adjective may, in common with the noun, denote the thing, they cannot strictly be called its name. To say that foolish and folly are each names of the same quality, would, I apprehend, lead to nothing but perplexity and error. It is true, if we are to confine the term noun to the simple name of the subject, we shall exclude the genitive singular from all right to this appellation; for it denotes, not the subject simply, but the subject in conjunction—the inflexion being equivalent to “belonging to.” This indeed is an inconsistency which can in no way be removed, unless by adopting the opinion of Wallis, who assigns no cases to English nouns, and considers man’s, king’s, &c., to be adjectives. And were we to adopt Mr. Tooke’s definition of our adjective, and say, “It is the name of a thing which is directed to be joined to another name of a thing,” it will follow, that king’s, man’s, are adjectives. In short, if the question be confined to the English language, we must, in order to remove all inconsistency, either deny the appellation of noun to the adjective, and, with Wallis, call the genitive case an adjective; or we must first call man’s, king’s, &c., adjectives; secondly, we must term happy, extravagant, mercenary, &c., nouns, though they are not names; and thirdly, we must assign the appellation of noun to the verb itself.
- 53. From this view of the subject the reader will perceive that the whole controversy depends on the meaning which we annex to the term noun. If by this term we denote simply the thing itself, without any accessary circumstance, then nothing can be called a noun but the name in its simple form. If to the term noun we assign a more extensive signification, as implying not only the thing itself simply and absolutely, but also any accessary idea, as conjunction, action, passion, and so forth, then it follows, that all words may be termed names. [36] The Saxons formed their comparative by er or ere, ar or ære, er, or, ur, yr, and their superlative by ast, aste, est, ist, ost, ust, yst. Now ar means before; hence the English words ere and erst. Thus, in Saxon, riht wisere means “righteous before,” “just before,” or “more than.” The suffix is equivalent to the Latin præ, and the Hebrew preposition min, signifying also before; the only difference being this, that what is a suffix to the Saxon adjective is in Hebrew a prefix to the consequent subject of comparison, and that in Latin the preposition following the positive stands alone. Mr. Bosworth, in his “Elements of Anglo-Saxon Grammar,” a work displaying sound philological principles, has remarked, that the Gothic superlative in itsa bears an obvious resemblance to some of the Greek superlatives, as, ἄριστος, κάλλιστος, βράδιστος. [37] Up and in are now used as adverbs and prepositions. [38] This phraseology is Hebraistic—“more than all his children” is the literal translation of the original, ְּמכל־בניו præ omnibus filiis, seu, magis omnibus filiis suis. [39] See a valuable little volume on English Grammar, by Mr. Grant. The “Institutes of Latin Grammar,” by the same author, we would recommend to the attention of every classical student. [40] I, hi, hie, “to go,” he considers to be from Ἰ-έναι, the Greek verb; and hence to be derived the Latin verb I-re, “to go,” “to hie.” [41] Intransitive verbs sometimes are used transitively, as, when we say, “to walk the horse,” “to dance the child.” They also admit a noun of their own signification, as, “to run a race.” [42] Conformably to general opinion I here consider the English language as having a passive voice. How far this opinion is well founded shall be the subject of future inquiry.
- 54. [43] Mr. Bosworth seems to think, that the word tense is derived from the Latin tensus, “used to denote that extension or inflexion of the word, by which difference in time is implied, or difference in action is signified.” I am rather inclined to consider it as derived from the French tems or temps, and that from tempus. [44] “Some,” says Dr. Beattie, “will not allow anything to be a tense, but what, in one inflected word, expresses an affirmation with time; for, that those parts of the verb are not properly called tenses, which assume that appearance, by means of auxiliary words. At this rate, in English, we should have two tenses only, the present and the past in the active verb, and in the passive no tenses at all. But this is a needless nicety; and, if adopted, would introduce confusion into the grammatical art. If amaveram be a tense, why should not amatus fueram? If I heard be a tense, I did hear, I have heard, and I shall hear, must be equally entitled to that appellation.” How simplicity can introduce confusion I am unable to comprehend, unless we are to affirm that the introduction of Greek and Latin names, to express nonentities in our language, is necessary to illustrate the grammar, and simplify the study of the language to the English scholar. But the author’s theory seems at variance with itself. He admits, that “we have no cases in English, except the addition of s in the genitive;” whence we may infer, that he considers inflexion as essential to a case. Now, if those only be cases, which are formed by inflexion, those only should, grammatically, be deemed tenses, which are formed in the same manner. When he asks, therefore, if amaveram be a tense, why should not amatus fueram be a tense also? the answer on his own principles is sufficiently obvious, namely, because the one is formed by inflexion, the other by combination. And, I would ask, if king’s be a genitive case, why, according to this theory, is not of a king entitled to the same appellation? I apprehend the answer he must give, consistently with his opinion respecting cases, will sufficiently explain why amaveram, and I heard, are tenses, while amatus fueram, and I had heard, are not. Nay, further, if it be needless nicety to admit those only as tenses, which are formed by inflexion, is it not equally a needless nicety to admit those cases only, which are formed by varying the termination? And if confusion be introduced by denying I had heard to be a tense, why does not the learned author simplify the doctrine of English nouns, by giving them six cases, a king, of a
- 55. king, to or for a king, a king, O king, with, from, in, or by a king? This surely would be to perplex, not to simplify. In short, the inconsistency of those grammarians, who deny that to be a case, which is not formed by inflexion, yet would load us with moods and tenses, not formed by change of termination, is so palpable, as to require neither illustration nor argument to expose it. If these authors would admit, that we have as many cases in English, as there exists relations expressed by prepositions, then, indeed, though they might overwhelm us with the number, we should at least acknowledge the consistency of their theory. But to adopt the principle of inflexion in one case, and reject it in another, precisely parallel, involves an inconsistency which must excite amazement. Nil fuit sic unquam impar sibi. Why do not these gentlemen favour us with a dual number, with a middle voice, and with an optative mood? Nay, as they are so fond of tenses, as to lament that we rob them of all but two, why do they not enrich us with a first and second aorist, and a paulo post future? and, if this should not suffice, they will find in Hebrew a rich supply of verbal forms. We should then have kal and niphal, pihhel and pyhhal, hiphhil and hophhal, hithpahhel and hothpahhel, and numerous other species and designations. What a wonderful acquisition this would be to our stock of moods, tenses, and voices! One of these grammarians, indeed, reverencing the old maxim est modus in rebus, observes, that “it is necessary to set bounds to this business, so as not to occasion obscurity and perplexity, when we mean to be simple and perspicuous.” This is so far good; because, though it vindicates the impropriety, it modestly would confine it within decent bounds. But surely it cannot be necessary to remind this writer, that when the boundary between right and wrong, propriety and impropriety, is once passed, it is extremely difficult to prescribe limits to the transgression; and that arbitrary distinctions, resting on no other foundation than prejudice or fashion, must ever be vague, questionable, and capricious. These are truths of which, I am persuaded, the author to whom I allude needs not to be reminded. But it may be necessary to impress on his attention another truth equally incontestable, that no authority, how respectable soever, can sanction inconsistency; and that great names, though they may be honoured by ignorance and credulity with the most obsequious homage, will never pass with the intelligent reader, either for demonstration or for argument. This author, in defence of his
- 56. theory of cases and tenses, observes, “that the proper form of a tense, in the Greek and Latin languages, is certainly that which it has in the grammars of these languages.” On what evidence is this assumption founded? Here is exhibited a petitio principii, too palpable to escape the detection of the most inattentive reader. He proceeds: “But in the Greek and Latin grammars we uniformly find that some of the tenses are formed by variations of the principal verb, and others by the addition of helping verbs.” It is answered that the admission of these forms in Greek and Latin grammars is a question of mere expediency, and nowise affects the doctrine for which we contend, any more than the admission of six cases in all the Latin declensions affects the doctrine of cases; though in no one declension have all the cases dissimilar terminations. This position it would be easy to demonstrate: it would be easy likewise to show why, notwithstanding this occasional identity of termination, six cases are admitted in all the declensions; but the subject is foreign to our present purpose. It is important, however, to observe, what has escaped the notice of the author, that the principle, on which the admission just mentioned may be expedient in a Latin grammar, has no existence whatever in the English language. “It is, therefore,” he continues, “indisputable, that the principal, or the participle, and an auxiliary, constitute a regular tense in the Greek and Latin languages.” This, as I have remarked, is a palpable petitio principii. It is to say, that because amatus fueram is a tense, therefore “I had been loved” is a tense also. The author forgets that the premises must be true, to render the conclusion legitimate. He forgets, that a circular argument is a mere sophism, because it assumes as true what it is intended to prove. Whether amatus fueram be or be not a tense, is the very point in question; and so far am I from admitting the affirmative as unquestionable, that I contend, it has no more claim to the designation of tense, than ἔσομαι τετυφώς—no more claim than amandum est mihi, amari oportet, or amandus sum, have to be called moods. Here I must request the reader to bear in mind the necessary distinction between the grammar of a language and its capacity of expression. In answer to the objection of inconsistency, in admitting tenses where there is no inflexion, yet rejecting cases where there is no change of termination, the author says, “that such a mode of declension cannot apply to our language.” But why can it not apply? Why not give as English cases, to a king, of a king, from a
- 57. king, with a king, by a king, at a king, about a king, &c. &c.? The mode is certainly applicable, whatever may be the consequences of that application. A case surely is as easily formed by a noun and preposition, as a tense by a participle and auxiliary. But the author observes, “the English language would then have a much greater number of cases than the Greek and Latin languages.” And why not? Is the number of cases in English, or any other language, to be limited by the number in Greek or Latin? or does the author mean to say, that there is any peculiar propriety in the number five or six? The author, to be consistent with himself, ought to acknowledge as many cases as there are prepositions to be found in the English language. This, it may be said, would encumber our grammar, and embarrass the learner. This is, indeed, an argument against the expediency of the application, but not against the practicability of the principle in question. Besides, it may be asked, why does the author confine his love of simplification to cases? Why not extend it to tenses also? Why maintain, that inflexion only makes a case, and that a tense is formed without inflexion? Why dismiss one encumbrance, and admit another? The author observes, that “from grammarians, who form their ideas and make their decisions respecting this part of grammar, on the principles and construction of languages, which in these points do not suit the peculiar nature of our own, but differ considerably from it, we may naturally expect grammatical schemes that are neither perspicuous nor consistent, and which will tend more to perplex than inform the learner.” Had I been reprehending the author’s own practice, I should have employed nearly the same language. How these observations, certainly judicious and correct, can be reconciled with the doctrine of the writer himself, I am utterly at a loss to conceive. His ideas of consistency and simplicity are to me incomprehensible. He rejects prepositional cases for the sake of simplicity, and he admits various moods and tenses, equally foreign to the genius of our language, in order to avoid perplexity. Surely this is not a “consistent scheme.” Nay, he tells us, “that on the principle of imitating other languages in names and forms (I beseech the reader to mark the words), without a correspondence in nature and idiom, we might adopt a number of declensions, as well as a variety of cases, for English substantives: but,” he adds, “this variety does not at all correspond with the idiom of our
- 58. language.” After this observation, argument surely becomes unnecessary. I have here, the reader will perceive, assailed the author’s doctrine merely on the ground of inconsistency. It is liable, however, to objections of a more serious nature; and were I not apprehensive that I have already exhausted the patience of the reader, I should now proceed to state these objections. There is one observation, however, which I feel it necessary to make. The author remarks, that to take the tenses as they are commonly received, and endeavour to ascertain their nature and their differences, “is a much more useful exercise, as well as a more proper, for a work of this kind, than to raise, as might be easily raised, new theories on the subject.” If the author by this intends to insinuate that our doctrine is new, he errs egregiously. For Wallis, one of the oldest, and certainly one of the best of our English grammarians, duly attentive to the simplicity of that language whose grammar he was exhibiting, assigned only two tenses to the English verb. He says, Nos duo tantum habemus tempora Præsens et Præteritum; and on this simple principle his explanation of the verb proceeds. In the preface to his grammar, he censures his few predecessors for violating the simplicity of the English language, by the introduction of names and rules foreign to the English idiom. Cur hujusmodi casuum, generum, modorum, temporumque fictam et ineptam plane congeriem introducamus citra omnem necessitatem, aut in ipsa lingua fundamentum, nulla ratio suadet. And so little was he aware that the introduction of technical names for things which have no existence, facilitates the acquisition of any art or science, that he affirms it in regard to the subject before us to be the cause of great confusion and perplexity. Quæ (inutilia præcepta) a lingua nostra sunt prorsus aliena, adeoque confusionem potius et obscuritatem pariunt, quam explicationi inserviunt. [45] Mr. Gilchrist, in his “Philosophic Etymology,” represents the terminations ath, eth, ad, ed, et, en, an, as conjunctives, equivalent to the sign +, denoting add, or join (see p. 162). In another part of the same work, he considers did to be do doubled, as dedi from the Latin do, which he believes to be the very same word with our do. Repetition, he observes, is a mode of expressing complete action. Hence we have do, do-ed, dede, did, in English. This explanation is ingenious, and furnishes a probable account of the origin of the word did, which he remarks was formerly spelled dede.
- 59. [46] I be Thou beest He, she, or it be We be Ye or you be They be, from the Saxon Ic beo Thu beest He beeth, are obsolete, unless followed by a concessive term. Thus, instead of saying, “Many there be that go in thereat,” we should now say, “Many there are.” For “to whom all hearts be open,” we should now write, “to whom all hearts are open.” We find them, however, used with the conjunctions if and though; thus, “If this be my notion of a great part of that high science, divinity, you will be so civil as to imagine, I lay no mighty stress upon the rest.”—Pope. That this was his notion the author had previously declared; the introductory clause, therefore, is clearly affirmative, and is the same as if he had said, “As this is my notion.” “Although she be abundantly grateful to all her protectors, yet I observe your name most often in her mouth.”—Swift. “The paper, although it be written with spirit, yet would have scarce cleared a shilling.”— Swift. In the two last sentences the meaning is affirmative; nothing conditional or contingent being implied. In the following examples, it expresses doubt or contingency. “If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down:” i.e. “shouldst be.” “If I be in difficulty, I will ask your aid;” i.e. “If I should be.” [47] Though the authority of Milton, Dryden, Pope, and Swift, can be pleaded in favour of wert, as the second person singular of this tense, I am inclined to agree with Lowth, that in conformity to analogy, as well as the practice of the best ancient writers, it would be better to confine wert to the imperfect conditional. [48] If the expression of time with an attribute “be sufficient to make a verb, the participle must be a verb too, because it signifies time also. But the essence of a verb consisting in predication, which is peculiar to it, and incommunicable to all other parts of speech, and these infinitives never predicating, they cannot be verbs. Again, the essence of a noun consisting in its so subsisting in the understanding, as that it may be the subject of predication, and these infinitives being all capable of so subsisting, they must of necessity be nouns.”—R. Johnson’s Gram. Comment.
- 60. [49] The variety of form which this verb assumes, clearly shows that it has proceeded from different sources. Am is from the Anglo-Saxon eom, and is from the Anglo-Saxon ys or is; and these have been supposed to have come from the Greek εἰμὶ, εἶς. The derivation of are is doubtful. It may, perhaps, have proceeded directly from er or erum of the Icelandic verb, denoting “to be.” By Mr. Gilchrist it is considered as “the same with the infinitive termination are, ere, ire.” Mr. Webb conjectured, that it might have some relation to the Greek ἔαρ, spring. Both these explanations appear to us somewhat fanciful. Art is from the Anglo-Saxon eart. “Thou eart,” thou art. Was is evidently the Anglo-Saxon wæs; and wast, wert, probably from the Franco-Theatisc, warst; and were from the Anglo-Saxon wære, wæron. Be is from the Anglo-Saxon Ic beo, I am, which, with the Gaelic verb bi, to be, Mr. Webb considered to be derived from βίος, life, as the Latin fui, from φύω, to grow. This conjecture he supports by several pertinent quotations. See Mr. Bosworth’s “Elements of Anglo-Saxon Grammar,” p. 164. [50] The words did, hast, hath, has, had, shall, wilt, are evidently, as Wallis observes, contracted for doed, haveth, haves, haved, shall’st, will’st. [51] This verb is derived from the Saxon magan, posse, the present of which is Ic mæg, and the preterite Ic miht. Hence also Ic mot. “For as the fisshe, if it be drie, Mote in defaute of water die.”—Gower. [52] This verb is derived from cunnan, scire, posse, sapere. Hence is derived the verb “to ken,” or “to know;” or more probably, indeed, they were one and the same word: hence also the word cunning. “To ken” is still used in Scotland; and in the expression of Shakspeare, “I ken them from afar,” is erroneously considered by some critics to mean, “I see them.” [53] This verb is, unquestionably, a derivative from the Saxon ꞅceal, I owe or I ought, and was originally of the same import. I shall denoted “it is my duty,” and was precisely synonymous with debeo in Latin. Chaucer says, “The faith I shall to God;” that is, “the faith I owe to God.” “Thou shalt not kill,” or “thou oughtest
- 61. not to kill.” In this sense shall is a present tense, and denoted present duty or obligation. But, as all duties and all commands, though present in respect to their obligation and authority, must be future in regard to their execution; so by a natural transition, observable in most languages, this word, significant of present duty, came to be a note of future time. I have considered it, however, as a present tense; 1st, because it originally denoted present time; 2dly, because it still retains the form of a present, preserving thus the same analogy to should that can does to could, may to might, will to would; and 3dly, because it is no singular thing to have a verb in the present tense, expressive of future time, commencing from the present moment; for such precisely is the Greek verb μέλλω, futurus sum. Nay, the verb will denotes present inclination, yet in some of its persons, like shall, expresses futurition. I have considered, therefore, the verb shall as a present tense, of which should is the preterperfect. Johnson’s explanation of the meaning of this verb is so perspicuous, that, as foreigners are apt to mistake its use, I shall here transcribe his words. I shall love: “it will be so that I must love,” “I am resolved to love.” Shall I love? “will it be permitted me to love?” “will it be that I must love?” Thou shalt love: “I command thee to love;” “it is permitted thee to love;” “it will be, that thou must love.” Shalt thou love? “will it be, that thou must love?” “will it be permitted thee to love?” He shall love: “it will be, that he must love;” “it is commanded that he love.” Shall he love? “is it permitted him to love?” The plural persons follow the signification of the singular. I transcribe also the same author’s explanation of the verb I will. I will come: “I am willing to come,” “I am determined to come.” Thou wilt come: “it must be, that thou must come,” importing necessity; or “it shall be, that thou shalt come,” importing choice. Wilt thou come? “hast thou determined to come?” importing choice. He will come: “he is resolved to come;” or “it must be, that he must come,” importing choice or necessity. Brightland’s short rule may be of some service in assisting foreigners to distinguish the use of these two verbs. It is this: “In the first person simply shall foretels: In will a threat, or else a promise, dwells; Shall in the second and the third does threat; Will simply then foretels the future feat.”
- 62. In addition to these directions for the use of shall and will, it is to be observed, that, when the second and third persons are represented as the subjects of their own expressions, or their own thoughts, shall foretels, as in the first person, thus, “he says he shall be a loser by this bargain:” “do you suppose you shall go?” “He hoped he should recover,” and “he hoped he would recover,” are expressions of different import. In the former, the two pronouns necessarily refer to the same person; in the latter, they do not. [54] This verb is derived from the Saxon verb willan, velle, the preterite of which is Ic wold. [55] The preterite would is frequently employed, like the Latin preterimperfect tense, to denote what is usual or customary. Thus, Quintilio si quid recitares, corrige, sodes, Hoc, aiebat, et hoc; melius te posse negares, Bis terque expertum frustra; delere jubebat, Et malè tornatos incudi reddere versus: Si defendere delictum quàm vertere, malles, Nullum ultra verbum, aut operam insumebat inanem. Horace. where the verbs aiebat, jubebat, insumebat, may be translated, “he would say,” “he would desire,” “he would spend.” Thus also in English, Pleas’d with my admiration, and the fire His speech struck from me, the old man would shake His years away, and act his young encounters: Then having show’d his wounds, he’d sit him down. [56] In Latin the imperfect potential is frequently employed in the same manner to denote present time; thus, irem si vellem, expresses present liberty and inclination. And the same analogy obtains in Latin; for we say, either, tu, si hic sis, aliter sentias, or tu, si hic esses, aliter sentires. In such examples, it is intended to signify either the coexistence of two circumstances, or the one as the immediate consequence of the other. An identity of tense, therefore, best expresses contemporary events. [57] If it should be said, that the participle may properly be considered as a verb, since it implies an attribute with time, I would ask, whether affirmation, the most important of all circumstances, and without which no communication could take place, should be overlooked in our classification of words
- 63. agreeably to their import, or the offices which they perform. If the verb and participle be referred to one class, the principal part of speech which has been pre-eminently distinguished by the name of verb, or the word, is degraded from its rank, and confounded with a species of words which are not even necessary to the communication of thought. Surely, if any circumstance can entitle any sort of words to a distinct reference, it is that of affirmation. If it should be objected that the participle, like the verb, governs a case, I would ask, because lectio, tactio, and many other substantives, are found sometimes joined with an accusative case, were they ever on this account considered as verbs? Besides, if the government of a case be urged as an argument, what becomes of those participles which govern no case? Nay, if the government of a case be deemed the criterion of a verb, what name shall we assign to those verbs which have no regimen at all? If any species of words is to be distinguished from another, the characteristic difference must surely belong, not to part only, but to the whole. [58] The termination ing is from the Anglo-Saxon ande, ænde, ende, ind, onde, unde, ynde, and corresponds to the termination of the Latin gerunds in andum and endum, expressing continuation, Amandum, Lufiande, Loving. [59] Here I would be understood to reason on their own principles; for the truth is, that each of these tenses admits a definitive. [60] See the Transactions of the Royal Irish Academy, vol. iii. [61] Dr. Beattie observes, “that the fundamental error of those philosophers who deny the existence of present time is, that they suppose the present instant to have, like a geometrical point, neither parts nor magnitude. But as nothing is, in respect of our senses, a geometrical point, (for whatever we see or touch must of necessity have magnitude,) so neither is the present, or any other instant, wholly unextended.” His argument amounts to this, that as a mathematical point is not an object of sense, nor has any real existence, so neither has a metaphysical instant. It is granted. They are each ideal. But does this prove the author’s position, that philosophers have erred in asserting their similarity? or does it evince that no analogy subsists between them? Quite the reverse. The truth is, a geometrical point is purely ideal; it is necessary to the truth of mathematical demonstration, that it be
- 64. conceived to have no parts. Finding it convenient to represent it to sense, we therefore give it magnitude. A metaphysical instant, or present time, is in like manner ideal; but we find it convenient to assume as present an extended space. The doctor observes, that sense perceives nothing but what is present. It is true; but it should be remembered that not time, but objects which exist in time, are perceived by the senses. It may enable a person to form a correct idea of this matter, if he will ask himself, what he means by present time. If it be the present hour, is it not obvious that part of it is past, and part of it future? If it be the present minute, it is equally clear, that the whole of it cannot be present at once. Nay, if it be the present vibration of the pendulum, is it not obvious that part of it is performed, and part of it remains to be performed? Nor is it possible to stop in this investigation, till present time, strictly speaking, be proved to have no existence. Did it exist, it must be extended; and if extended, it cannot be present, for past and future must necessarily be included in it. If it should be answered, that this proves time, like matter, infinitely divisible, and that the most tedious process will still leave something capable of division, I reply, that as whatever may be left in the one case must be figure, and not a point, so the remainder, in the other, must be a portion of extended time, how minute soever, and not an instant. The process, therefore, must be continued, till we arrive in idea at a point and an instant, incapable of division, being not made up of parts. [62] When we say, God is good, I would ask Dr. Browne whether the verb be definite or indefinite, whether it denote perfection or imperfection, or have no reference to either. It appears to me that neither of the terms is in his sense applicable; for that the verb denotes simple affirmation with time; or, if applicable, that the tense is, contrary to his opinion, indefinite, the idea of completion or imperfection being entirely excluded. [63] These phraseologies, as the author last quoted justly observes, are harsh to the ear, and appear exceedingly awkward; but a little attention will suffice to show that they correctly exhibit the ideas implied by the tense which we have at present under consideration. [64] See Encyc. Brit., Art. Grammar. [65] I consider that no language, grammatically examined, has more cases, tenses, or moods, than are formed by inflexion. But if any person be inclined to call these forms of expression by the
- 65. name of imperative mood, I have no objection. Only let him be consistent, and call “Dost thou love?” an interrogative mood, adopting also the precative, the requisitive, the optative, the hortative, &c., together with the various cases in nouns, and tenses in verbs, which are formed by prepositions and auxiliary verbs: I should only apprehend, that language would fail him to assign them names. If it should be asked, “Agreeably to your doctrine of the verb, as implying affirmation, what part of speech would you make the verbs in the following sentences, Depart instantly, improve your time, forgive us our sins? Will it be said that the verbs in these phrases are assertions?” I should answer that all moods, metaphysically considered, are, in my apprehension, equally indicative. Every possible form of speech can do nothing but express the sentiment of the speaker, his desire, his wish, his sensation, his perception, his belief, &c. Whatever form, therefore, the expression may assume, it must be resolvable into assertion; and must be considered as expressing, in the person of the speaker, what he desires, wishes, feels, thinks, and so forth. No one surely will deny, that “thou oughtest not to kill,” “thou shalt not kill,” “thou art forbidden to kill,” are affirmations. And are not these expressions so nearly equivalent to “do not kill,” that in Greek and Latin they are rendered indifferently either by οὐ φονεύσεις, or, μὴ φόνευε; non occides, or ne occidito? If then we say, “kill thou,” will it be contended that, though the prohibition implies an affirmation of the speaker, the command does not? The expression I conceive to be strictly equivalent to “thou shalt kill,” “thou art ordered to kill.” Hence ave and jubeo te avere, are deemed expressions of the same import. If the question be examined grammatically, or as a subject of pure grammar, I am inclined to think that where there is no variety of termination, there cannot be established a diversity of mood. [66] This verb is derived from the Saxon verb Ic most, ego debeo. [67] It belongs not to my province to inquire, how amarem came to signify I might or could love, or whether it be strictly in the potential or the subjunctive mood. I here take it for granted that amarem does, without an ellipsis, signify, I might, could, would, or should love, implying licet, possum, volo, debeo.—See Johnson’s Comment.
- 66. [68] Why this verb forms an exception, it would be easy to explain. [69] See Webster’s Dissertations, p. 263. [70] A similar phraseology in the use of the pluperfect indicative for the same tense subjunctive, obtains in Latin, as “Impulerat ferro Argolicas fœdare latebras.”—Virgil. [71] The Latins used si in both cases: and though their poets did not attend to this distinction, their prose writers generally observed it, by joining si for quoniam with the indicative mood. [72] Where r is added, the verb follows also the general rule. [73] Some have excluded bore as the preterite of this verb. We have sufficient authority, however, for admitting it; thus, “By marrying her who bore me.”—Dryden. [74] Beholden is obsolescent in this sense. [75] “So kept the diamond, and the rogue was bit.”—Pope. “There was lately a young gentleman bit to the bone.”—Tatler. [76] Brake seems now obsolescent. [77] Though Johnson has not admitted the regular form of the participle in this verb, I think there is sufficient authority for concurring with Lowth in receiving builded as the participle as well as built, though it be not in such general use. [78] Chode, which occurs twice in the Bible, is now obsolete. [79] Lowth has given clomb as the preterite of climb. I can find, however, no authority later than Spenser, and am inclined to think it is now obsolete. [80] The irregular preterite clad is obsolescent. [81] I know no example in which the preterite, which analogically would be forwent, is to be found. It may be here remarked that this verb, in violation of analogy, is generally spelled forego, as if it meant “to go before.” This is equally improper as it would be to write forebid, foresake, foreswear, for forbid, forsake, forswear. [82] Fraught is more properly an adjective than participle. [83] This verb, Lowth says, when employed as an active verb, “may perhaps, most properly be used in the regular form.” Here the learned author appears to me, if he be not chargeable with
- 67. error, to have expressed his meaning incorrectly; for it cannot be disputed that the irregular form of this verb is frequently, and with unquestionable propriety, used in an active sense. Thus we say, “the servant hung the scales in the cellar;” and passively, “the scales were hung by the servant.” I should, therefore, rather say that, when this verb denotes suspension, for the purpose of destroying life, the regular form is far preferable. Thus, “the man was hanged,” not “hung.” [84] The irregular preterite and participle of this verb are employed in sea language; but the latter rarely. [85] Lowth has given holpen as the participle; it is now obsolescent, if not obsolete. It belonged to the verb to holp, which has been long out of use. [86] Several grammarians have rejected hid as a participle. It rests, however, on unquestionable authority; but hidden is preferable. [87] Holden, which was some years ago obsolescent, is now returning into more general use. [88] Laden, like fraught, may be deemed an adjective. [89] Priestley, I apprehend, has erred in giving lain as the participle of this verb. [90] Lien, though not so generally used as lain, is not destitute of unexceptionable authority. I have, therefore, with Johnson and Lowth, given it as the participle. Murray has omitted it. [91] Some grammarians have rejected lit. It can plead, however, colloquial usage in its favour, and even other authority. “I lit my pipe with the paper.”—Addison. [92] With Priestley and Lowth, I have given this verb a regular participle; for which, I believe, there is sufficient authority, without adducing the example of Shakspeare. Most other grammarians have rejected it. [93] Quitted is far more generally used as the preterite than quit. [94] Priestley has rejected rid, and Murray ridden, as the participle, while Johnson makes rid the preterite of ride. As rid is the present and preterite of another verb, it would, perhaps, be better to dismiss it entirely from the verb to ride, and conjugate, with Priestley, ride, rode, ridden.
- 68. Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world, offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth. That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to self-development guides and children's books. More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading. Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and personal growth every day! testbankbell.com