id="id00273">It is better to adhere, in most cases, to Rule 25, which may be called (Bain) the Rule of Proximity. The Rule of Emphasis, of which an instance was given in the last paragraph, is sometimes misleading. A distinction might be drawn by punctuating thus:

"David the father of Solomon, who slew Goliath." "David, the father of Solomon who built the Temple." But the propriety of omitting a comma in each case is questionable, and it is better to write so as not to be at the mercy of commas.

*26. Clauses that are grammatically connected should be kept as close together as possible.* (But see 55.) The introduction of parentheses violating this rule often produced serious ambiguity. Thus, in the following: "The result of these observations appears to be in opposition to the view now generally received in this country, that in muscular effort the substance of the muscle itself undergoes disintegration." Here it is difficult to tell whether the theory of "disintegration" is (1) "the result," or, as the absence of a comma after "be" would indicate, (2) "in opposition to the result of these observations." If (1) is intended, add "and to prove" after "country;" if (2), insert "which is" after "country."

There is an excessive complication in the following:—"It cannot, at all events, if the consideration demanded by a subject of such importance from any one professing to be a philosopher, be given, be denied that &c."

Where a speaker feels that his hearers have forgotten the connection of the beginning of the sentence, he should repeat what he has said; e.g. after the long parenthesis in the last sentence he should recommence, "it cannot, I say, be denied." In writing, however, this licence must be sparingly used.

A short parenthesis, or modifying clause, will not interfere with clearness, especially if antithesis he used, so as to show the connection between the different parts of the sentence, e.g. "A modern newspaper statement, though probably true, would be laughed at if quoted in a book as testimony; but the letter of a court gossip is thought good historical evidence if written some centuries ago." Here, to place "though probably true" at the beginning of the sentence would not add clearness, and would impair the emphasis of the contrast between "a modern newspaper statement" and "the letter of a court gossip."

*27. In conditional sentences, the antecedent clauses must be kept distinct from the consequent clauses.*—There is ambiguity in "The lesson intended to be taught by these manoeuvres will be lost, if the plan of operations is laid down too definitely beforehand, and the affair degenerates into a mere review." Begin, in any case, with the antecedent, "If the plan," &c. Next write, according to the meaning: (1) "If the plan is laid down, and the affair degenerates &c., then the lesson will be lost;" or (2) " … then the lesson … will be lost, and the affair degenerates into a mere review."

*28. Dependent clauses preceded by "that" should be kept distinct from those that are independent.*

Take as an example:

(1) "He replied that he wished to help them, and intended to make preparations accordingly."

This ought not to be used (though it sometimes is, for shortness) to mean:

(2) "He replied …, and he intended."

In (1), "intended," having no subject, must be supposed to be connected with the nearest preceding verb, in the same mood and tense, that has a subject, i.e. "wished." It follows that (1) is a condensation of:

(3) "He replied that he wished …, and that he intended."

(2), though theoretically free from ambiguity, is practically ambiguous, owing to a loose habit of repeating the subject unnecessarily. It would be better to insert a conjunctional word or a full stop between the two statements. Thus:

(4) "He replied that he wished to help them, and indeed he intended," &c., or "He replied, &c. He intended, &c."

Where there is any danger of ambiguity, use (3) or (4) in preference to (1) or (2).

*29. When there are several infinitives, those that are dependent on the same word must be kept distinct from those that are not.*

"He said that he wished to take his friend with him to visit the capital and to study medicine." Here it is doubtful whether the meaning is—

"He said that he wished to take his friend with him,

(1) and also to visit the capital and study medicine," or

(2) "that his friend might visit the capital and might also study medicine," or

(3) "on a visit to the capital, and that he also wished to study medicine."

From the three different versions it will be perceived that this ambiguity must be met (a) by using "that" for "to," which allows us to repeat an auxiliary verb [e.g. "might" in (2)], and (b) by inserting conjunctions. As to insertions of conjunctions, see (37).

"In order to," and "for the purpose of," can be used to distinguish (wherever there is any ambiguity) between an infinitive that expresses a purpose, and an infinitive that does not, e.g. "He told his servant to call upon his friend, to (in order to) give him information about the trains, and not to leave him till he started."

*30. The principle of suspense.* Write your sentence in such a way that, until he has come to the full stop, the reader may feel the sentence to be incomplete. In other words, keep your reader in suspense. Suspense is caused (1) by placing the "if-clause" first, and not last, in a conditional sentence; (2) by placing participles before the words they qualify; (3) by using suspensive conjunctions, e.g. not only, either, partly, on the one hand, in the first place, &c.

The following is an example of an unsuspended sentence. The sense draggles, and it is difficult to keep up one's attention.

"Mr. Pym was looked upon as the man of greatest experience in parliaments, | where he had served very long, | and was always a man of business, | being an officer in the Exchequer, | and of a good reputation generally, | though known to be inclined to the Puritan party; yet not of those furious resolutions (Mod. Eng. so furiously resolved) against the Church as the other leading men were, | and wholly devoted to the Earl of Bedford,—who had nothing of that spirit."

The foregoing sentence might have ended at any one of the eight points marked above. When suspended it becomes:—

"Mr. Pym, owing to his long service in Parliament in the Exchequer, was esteemed above all others for his Parliamentary experience and for his knowledge of business. He had also a good reputation generally; for, though openly favouring the Puritan party, he was closely devoted to the Earl of Bedford, and, like the Earl, had none of the fanatical spirit manifested against the Church by the other leading men."

*30 a. It is a violation of the principle of Suspense to introduce unexpectedly, at the end of a long sentence, some short and unemphatic clause beginning with (a) " … not" or (b) " … which."*

(a) "This reform has already been highly beneficial to all classes of our countrymen, and will, I am persuaded, encourage among us industry, self-dependence, and frugality, and not, as some say, wastefulness."

Write "not, as some say, wastefulness, but