in some instances, prepositions appear to govern adverbs, or even whole phrases. See the observations in the tenth chapter of Etymology.
OBS. 5.—Both terms of the relation are usually expressed; though either of them may, in some instances, be left out, the other being given: as, (1.) THE FORMER—"All shall know me, [reckoning] FROM the least to the greatest."—Heb., viii, 11. [I say] "IN a word, it would entirely defeat the purpose."—Blair. "When I speak of reputation, I mean not only [reputation] IN regard to knowledge, but [reputation] IN regard to the talent of communicating knowledge."—Campbell's Rhet., p. 163; Murray's Gram., i, 360. (2.) THE LATTER—"Opinions and ceremonies [which] they would die FOR."—Locke. "IN [those] who obtain defence, or [in those] who defend."—Pope. "Others are more modest than [what] this comes TO."—Collier's Antoninus, p. 66.
OBS. 6.—The only proper exceptions to the foregoing rule, are those which are inserted above, unless the abstract infinitive used as a predicate is also to be excepted; as, "In both, to reason right, is to submit."—Pope. But here most if not all grammarians would say, the verb "is" is the antecedent term, or what their syntax takes to govern the infinitive. The relation, however, is not such as when we say, "He is to submit;" that is, "He must submit, or ought to submit;" but, perhaps, to insist on a different mode of parsing the more separable infinitive or its preposition, would be a needless refinement. Yet some regard ought to be paid to the different relations which the infinitive may bear to this finite verb. For want of a due estimate of this difference, the following sentence is, I think, very faulty: "The great business of this life is to prepare, and qualify us, for the enjoyment of a better."—Murray's Gram., Vol. i, p. 373. If the author meant to tell what our great business in this life is, he should rather have said: "The great business of this life is, to prepare and qualify ourselves for the enjoyment of a better."
OBS. 7.—In relation to the infinitive, Dr. Adam remarks, that, "To in English is often taken absolutely; as, To confess the truth; To proceed; To conclude."—Latin and Eng. Gram., p. 182. But the assertion is not entirely true; nor are his examples appropriate; for what he and many other grammarians call the infinitive absolute, evidently depends on something understood; and the preposition is, surely, in no instance independent of what follows it, and is therefore never entirely absolute. Prepositions are not to be supposed to have no antecedent term, merely because they stand at the head of a phrase or sentence which is made the subject of a verb; for the phrase or sentence itself often contains that term, as in the following example: "In what way mind acts upon matter, is unknown." Here in shows the relation between acts and way; because the expression suggests, that mind acts IN some way upon matter.
OBS. 8.—The second exception above, wherever it is found applicable, cancels the first; because it introduces an antecedent term before the preposition to, as may be seen by the examples given. It is questionable too, whether both of them may not also be cancelled in an other way; that is, by transposition and the introduction of the pronoun it for the nominative: as, "It is a great affliction, TO be reduced to poverty."—"It is hard FOR man to tell how human life began."—"Nevertheless it is more needful for you, THAT I should abide in the flesh." We cannot so well say, "It is more needful for you, FOR me to abide in the flesh;" but we may say, "It is, on your account, more needful FOR me to abide in the flesh." If these, and other similar examples, are not to be accounted additional instances in which to and for, and also the conjunction that, are without any proper antecedent terms, we must suppose these particles to show the relation between what precedes and what follows them.
OBS. 9.—The preposition (as its name implies) precedes the word which it governs. Yet there are some exceptions. In the familiar style, a preposition governing a relative or an interrogative pronoun, is often separated from its object, and connected with the other term of relation; as, "Whom did he speak to?" But it is more dignified, and in general more graceful, to place the preposition before the pronoun; as, "To whom did he speak?" The relatives that and as, if governed by a preposition, must always precede it. In some instances, the pronoun must be supplied in parsing; as, "To set off the banquet [that or which] he gives notice of."—Philological Museum, i, 454. Sometimes the objective word is put first because it is emphatical; as, "This the great understand, this they pique themselves upon."—Art of Thinking, p. 66. Prepositions of more than one syllable, are sometimes put immediately after their objects, especially in poetry; as, "Known all the world over."—Walker's Particles p. 291. "The thing is known all Lesbos over."—Ibid.
"Wild Carron's lonely woods among."—Langhorne.
"Thy deep ravines and dells along."—Sir W. Scott.
OBS. 10.—Two prepositions sometimes come together; as, "Lambeth is over against Westminster abbey."—Murray's Gram., i, 118. "And from before the lustre of her face, White break the clouds away."—Thomson. "And the meagre fiend Blows mildew from between his shrivell'd lips."—Cowper. These, in most instances, though they are not usually written as compounds, appear naturally to coalesce in their syntax, as was observed in the tenth chapter of Etymology, and to express a sort of compound relation between the other terms with which they are connected. When such is their character, they ought to be taken together in parsing; for, if we parse them separately, we must either call the first an adverb, or suppose some very awkward ellipsis. Some instances however occur, in which an object may easily be supplied to the former word, and perhaps ought to be; as, "He is at liberty to sell it at [a price] above a fair remuneration."—Wayland's Moral Science, p. 258. "And I wish they had been at the bottom of the ditch I pulled you out of, instead of [being] upon my back."—Sandford and Merton, p. 29. In such examples as the following, the first preposition, of, appears to me to govern the plural noun which
