previous next

PRONOUNS, RELATIVE AND INTERROGATIVE. Relative omitted and attracted

The Relative is omitted in the following example, and the antecedent is attracted into the case which the relative, if present, would have:

Him (he whom) I accuse,
By this, the city ports hath enter'd.

Apparently there is an ellipsis of "that (relative) is" before participles in the following:

“Not that devour'd, but that which doth devour,
Is worthy blame,

where "that devour'd" seems used for "that that is devour'd."

“Why have you not proclaim'd Northumberland,
And all the rest (that are) revolted, faction-traitors?

And in

“I hate the murderer, love him murdered,

the meaning seems to be, not "I love the fact that he is murdered," but "I love him (who is) murdered." Compare the harsh construction in

“But you must know your father lost a father,
That father (who was) lost, lost his.

“A little riper and more lusty red
Than that (which is) mixed in his cheek.

The relative is attracted to a subsequent implied object in the following:

“Thou shalt not lack
The leaf of eglantine, whom not to slander,
Outsweetened not thy breath.

i.e. "the leaf which, not to slander it, would not outsweeten," &c.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: