Part 8 (1/2)
An _intransitive_ verb ”denotes action which is confined to the actor, and does not pass over to another object; as, I sit, he lives, they sleep”
”A verb _neuter_ expresses neither action nor passion, but being, or a state of being; as, I am, I sleep, I sit”
These verbs are nearly allied in character; but ill examine them separately and fairly The examples are the same, with exception of the verb _to be_, which ill notice by itself, and soe, in another place
Our first object will be to ascertain the _iven as samples of neutrality It is unfortunate for the neuter syste it express an action which terminates on some object
”The man _sits_ in his chair”
_Sits_, we are told, is a neuter verb What does itposture in his _seat_ He _keeps_ hiravitation The chair _upholds_ hi a small child and _sit_ it (active verb,) in a chair beside him Can it _sit_? No; it falls upon the floor and is injured Why did it fall? It was not able to _keep_ itself fro The lady fainted and _fell_ fro, why did she not reentlee, entered the parlor of a teacher of neuter verbs; and he asked them to _sit_ down, or be _seated_ They were neutral He called them impolite
But they replied, that _sit_ ”expresses neither action nor passion,” and hence he could not expect them to occupy his seats
”_Sit_ or _set_ it away; _sit_ near ; _sit_ still;” are expressions used by every teacher in addressing his scholars On the syste, ould they understand by such inactive expressions? Would he not correct the his orders? But what did he order the at all, if _sit_ denotes no action
”I _sat_ me down and wept”
”He _sat him_ down by a pillar's base, And drew his hand athwart his face”
_Byron_
”Then, having shown his wounds, he'd _sit hi day, discourse of war”
_Tragedy of Douglass_
”But wherefore _sits he_ there?
Death on my state! _This act_ convinces me That this retiredness of the duke and her, Is plain conte_, the _act of resting_ on a seat
_Session_, the _act of sitting_”
_Johnson's Dictionary_
”_I sleep_”
Is sleep a neuter verb? So we are gravely told by our authors Can grammarians follow their own rules? If so, theyhours,” without resorting to ”tired nature's sweet restorer, balmy sleep;” for there is no process under heaven whereby they can procure sleep, unless they _sleep_ it For one, I can never _sleep_ without sleeping _sleep_--sometimes only a short _nap_ It matters not whether the object is expressed or not The action remains the same The true object is necessarily understood, and it would be superfluous to na and writing, it becomes indispensable to mention the object
”The stout hearted have _slept_ their sleep” ”They shall _sleep_ the _sleep_ of death” ”They shall _sleep_ the perpetual _sleep_, and shall not awake” ”_Sleep_ on now and _take_ your rest” The child was troubleso it to sleep, and it _slept itself_ quiet A lady took opium and _slept herself_ to death ”Many persons sleep themselves into a kind of unnatural stupidity” Rip Van Winkle, according to the legend, _slept_ away a large portion of a co cares”
”And _sleep_ dull _cares_ away”
Was your sleep refreshi+ng last night? How did you procure it? Let a person who still adheres to his _neuter_ verbs, that sleep expresses no action, and has no object on which it terminates, put his theory in practice; heup, as to _lie hied in an open chaht_ a severe _cold_ (active transitive verb) and had a long _run_ of the fever Who does not see, not only the bad, but also the false philosophy of such attempted distinctions? How can you _, whether there is an object after it, or not? Is it not the same? And is not the object necessarily implied, whether expressed or not? Can a person _sleep_, without procuring _sleep_?
”_I stand_”