(2) Others are used both as substitutes for nouns and as adjectives limiting nouns: eg. that, what. In the sentence, 'I like that book,' that is an adjective: in 'I like that,' it is a substitute for a noun (though we might also regard it as an adjective with a noun understood, just as we understand the noun 'horse' to be implied with the adjective 'black' in the sentence 'I like the white horse better than the black'). In the sentence What did he do?' what takes the place of a noun: in' What work did he do?' it is an adjective limiting the meaning of work.

(3) A few so-called pronouns are used only as adjectives, but they are usually dealt with under the head of pronouns because they are connected with pronouns in their origin: e.g. my, your. Thus we can say, 'My book is lost,' but not 'My is lost'; 'Lend me your book,' not 'Lend me your.'

Keeping these distinctions in view, we may arrange the various classes of Pronouns in the following manner:

VIII. POSSESSIVE-my, our; thy, your; her, its, their.

The Possessives ours, yours, hers, theirs, are used when no noun follows them, and in this respect they resemble nouns, but their force is purely adjectival. The same remarks apply to mine and thine in modern diction. His admits of use either with or without a noun following.

The Distributive pronoun every is now used only as an adjective, except occasionally in legal phraseology.

122. Definitions of the different kinds of Pronouns.

I. Personal.

The Pronoun of the First Person is used in the singular to denote the speaker alone, and in the plural to denote the speaker and others with whom he is associated.

The Pronoun of the Second Person is used of the person or persons addressed.

2. A Demonstrative Pronoun is one which points out a thing.

3. A Reflexive Pronoun denotes the object of an action when the object is the same as the doer of the action.

4. A Relative Pronoun is one which refers to some other nouns or pronoun and has the force of a conjunction.

5. An Interrogative Pronoun is one by means of which we ask a question.

6. An Indefinite Pronoun is one which does not point out precisely the object to which it refers.

7. A Distributive Pronoun is used when there are more things than one, to denote that the things are taken separately.

8. A Possessive Pronominal Adjective denotes that the noun which it limits is the name of a thing belonging to some other thing.

With the exception of the word Relative, the adjectives by which the kinds of pronouns are described convey a clearer notion of their characteristic features than these definitions will afford. The student should carefully notice the Examples of Pronouns given in the Table under their respective heads and observe the appropriateness of the names by which the various classes are distinguished.

We will now consider the different classes in detail.

123. I. The Pronouns of the First, Second, and Third Persons are declined thus:

(1) There cannot be a plural of I at all, strictly speaking. We does not mean 1+1, as horses means horse + horse: there is in the nature of things for each of us only one I. We signifies really I+you, or I+they.

(2) Why should the pronouns denoting the 1st and the 2nd Person have no distinctions of Gender, while the pronoun denoting the 3rd Person possesses a set of inflexions to mark Gender?

Because when I am addressing you, our sex is not a matter of doubt, as we are both of us present; but when we are speaking of a third thing, it is desirable for greater certainty to indicate whether it possesses sex or not, and what sex, as it may be absent.

(3) The Pronoun of the Third Person is sometimes called a Personal pronoun, but it is better to class it with the Demonstratives. She was not originally the feminine of he: she was the feminine of the Old English definite article or demonstrative adjective, which supplied us also with our forms of the plural number, they, their, them1.

The tin it is a sign of the neuter, like the d in illud. Its is a modern word, occurring rarely in Shakespeare, at the beginning of the 17th century, and frequently in Dryden, at the end of it. It appears once in the Authorized Version of the Bible (Levit. xxv. 5) as it is now printed, but not in the original edition of 1611. His was formerly the genitive case of both he and it: If the salt have lost his savour.'

(4) The forms of these Pronouns in the Possessive case are used no longer as Personal Pronouns, but only as Possessive Adjectives. Thus my and thy are equivalents of the Latin meus and tuus, not of mei and tui. Pars mei must be rendered a part of me,' not 'my part;' 'forgetfulness of you' is not expressed by saying 'your forgetfulness,' nor 'envy of them' by saying 'their envy.' Passages may be found however in Shakespeare, or in the Authorized Version of the Bible, in which my, mine, his, our, your, their, &c., are used as true genitives of the Personal Pronouns. Thus, in the words, 'My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me,' (John vii. 16) mine signifies 'of me,' and his 'of him.' Similarly, 'Be not afraid of their terror' (1 Peter iii. 14) means 'Be not afraid of the terror of them,' and 'In thy fear will I worship' (Psalm v. 7) means 'In the fear of Thee will I worship.' These forms

1 In Old English the Pronoun of the Third Person was declined in the nominative case thus: masc. he, fem. heo, neut. hit. Of these forms we have retained he and (h)it, but have borrowed the feminine she from the feminine seo of the Demonstrative, masc. se, fem. seo, neut. þæt ("that"). The colloquial 'em, as in 'Give it 'em,' is a survival of hem, the old dative plural of he, not a corruption of them.

belong to the Personal Pronouns by origin, but have become purely adjectival in force. We have therefore enclosed them in brackets.

(5) Thou is used only in addressing God and in the flights of poetry or rhetoric. But half-a-century ago the Quakers employed thou and thee in ordinary speech. In the Elizabethan age thou and thee expressed affection or contempt, as is the case with tu in French and du in German to-day. The plural you is now used exclusively, whether we are addressing several individuals or only one. Sovereigns adopt this plural style in their manifestoes when speaking of themselves and say 'We' for 'I.' Editors of newspapers express their opinions in the same fashion, frequently with effects which are droll rather than impressive.

In an older stage of our language, ye was reserved for the nominative and you for the objective: Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you.' Ye occurs now only in the diction of poetry.

(6) The dative me survives in methinks, meseems, woe is me,' and as the indirect object, e.g. 'do me a service'; here me is equivalent to 'for me' or 'to me.'

125.

II.

Demonstrative Pronouns.

This and that are employed to denote the latter and the former, like the Latin hic and ille,-this the one nearer to us, that the one farther away.

That is by origin the neuter of the definite article or demonstrative adjective: the t is a sign of gender as in it and what.

Those is used as the plural of that, these as the plural of this these and those are really forms of the plural of this.

126. III. Reflexive Pronouns.

Myself, ourselves, yourself, yourselves, himself, herself, itself, themselves, oneself.

(1) Take care of yourself,' 'They killed themselves.' In such sentences we have the reflexive use of these pronouns: the action performed by the doer passes back to him, so both the subject and the object of the sentence stand for the same person.

(2) 'Take care yourself,' 'They themselves killed it.' In such sentences we have the emphatic use of these pronouns there is nothing reflexive in their meaning here.

127. The compounds of self present difficult problems which are rendered still more obscure by research into their forms at earlier stages of the language. Let us take the words myself, ourselves, himself, and themselves, and see if, keeping our heads clear of historical details, we can give a satisfactory account of the words as they exist to-day. In the first place, what part of speech is self?

A noun: we speak of 'love of self'; ‘a sacrifice of self'; we say 'Self makes demands on one's time.' Nouns take inflexions to mark the plural; self becomes selves. Nouns are limited in application by adjectives: my and our are possessive adjectives. There is no particular difficulty in understanding how the word myself came to be used both for reflexive and for emphatic purposes. If self means 'one's own person,' 'I myself did it' is a way of saying 'I did it of my own person': 'I hurt myself' is a way of saying 'I hurt my own person.' Thus far all is fairly simple.

But then by analogy we should expect the forms hisself and theirselves. Is there any way of explaining the forms himself and themselves?

In the first place, self must still be regarded as a noun, for it forms a plural selves. In the second place, him and them are pronouns, or the equivalents of nouns, in the objective case. Now the relation of the nouns him and self, them and selves, not being one of dependence, (for if it were, one of the words would be in the possessive case, which it is not), must be one of apposition. Therefore the entire words must be composed of two nouns in the objective case standing in apposition. And this explanation fits in very well with the reflexive use of himself, themselves, 'He struck himself,' 'They hurt themselves,' where nouns in the objective case are required. But then we can also say emphatically 'He himself did it,' 'They themselves said so,' using himself and themselves as subjects. Here the explanation breaks down. We can assume, if we like, that people lost sight of the original objective force of these words and came to use them as nominatives, just as we use me as a nominative, when we say 'It's me.'

Applying these conclusions to the forms one's self and oneself we may say that both can be justified: the former shows us one's in a relation of dependence on the noun self, and therefore in the possessive case; the latter exhibits the two words one and self in apposition.

This is the simplest explanation which we can offer of these compounds of self, as we find them existing now. The reader must not suppose however that the earlier history of these obscure forms affords any foundation for this mode of treating them.