We ought first to attend to those phrases in which a verb governs one noun in the accusative, and another in the da tive. This may be a verb of giving, as in Dedit mihi dex tram, or a verb of declaring, as in Narras fabulam surdo. One difference seems here to take place, that there is a more ready and rapid transition to the idea expressed in the accusative, than to that expressed in the dative ; and the idea which is expressed in the accusative is more ne cessary to the completion of a significant phrase than the other. Dedit dextranz, awl narras fabulam, though both evidently incomplete sentences, ..ire not quite so deficient as dedit mihi, or narras surdo. The verb is so contrived in the arbitrary application of words, as to lead the hearer to expect with greater rapidity and impatience tile idea which is subjoined in the accusative, than that which is in the dative. When the d itive is placed first in order, as in the phrase dedit mini dextram, we are sensible of a de gree of inversion, or a short suspension of the governed word most nearly connected with the verb. This mode of speech is contrived for the sake of variety and elegance, or for the convenience of dwelling on the idea expressed in the accusative, by attaching to the noun some additional parts of speech ; as, ?arras mini fabuks gigantum plirst In the use of verbs of giving and declaring, a differ ence in the actual relations of the object mentioned in the accusative and that in the dative case is evident; but in verbs of comparing no difference of this sort is necessarily implied. The sentences, Comparo Vhgniunn Homero, and Comparo Homerunz Virgilio, may he used for conveying the same meaning in exactly the same manner as to thought. The interest taken in one of the objects com pared may not be greater than that taken in the other, and the transition made to the two may be equal in its degree of rapidity and deliberateness. At the same time, if there is any such difference of interest, it seems natural to put that object to the description of which the comparison is principally subordinate in the accusative, and the other in the dative.
These facts may furnish some illustration of those phrases in which a verb governs the dative case alone ; for ex ample, the verbs nocere,favere, placere, and resistere. The English verbs into which these are translated are equally transitive, and govern the same form of the noun, with those which correspond to Latin verbs governing the ac cusative. But in the Latin language it is probable that they are not so completely transitive, and resemble in their genus those English verbs to which nouns are subjoined through the medium of the preposition to, as the verbs "yield," and "submit." Thus the translation of obedire by the verb " submit" would be more accurate than by " obey," in so far as regimen is concerned, although the former of these English verbs, as applied to the expres sion of ideas, may be less nearly co-extensive with the Latin word. It is conceivable that a verb, which is ori ginally not used transitively, may be more easily made to govern the dative than the accusative, whether it is em ployed in its simple state, or in composition. The verb resistere, for example, is derived from sistere, which sig nifies to stop or remain fixed, and does not prepare the hearer to expect the mention of any other object affected.
This state, however, admits of being also mentioned as an impediment to the progress of another. The name of this other may be subjoined with a slight degree of ceremony ; and a semi-transitive verb may be formed signifying that fixed state, together with an intention of mentioning the object impeded. The machinery of prepositions or other intervening words, for the introduction of the latter object,. is dispensed with; yet the verb is made to govern a case which implies some slight degree of ceremony in the men tal transition intended.
We have heard it suggested that a verb which governs a single noun in the dative implies in itself the force of a noun governed in the accusative; that resistere, for exam ple, has the force of the phrase obstaculum opponere. Whether this suggestion has any truth in an etymological point of view, or is in any degree to be considered as a probable account of the sentiments originally attached to such verbs, we shall not stop to inquire. But a translation of sonic phrases, on this principle, into the English lan guage, will afford us a clear analysis of these two cases, as well as of the verbs which respectively govern them, and yet are otherwise synonymous. The English language expresses the dative by means of the preposition to pre fixed to the sante form of the word which constitutes the ac• curative ; just as if, in Latin, the dative case were want ing, and the meaning of it always expressed by the pre position ad with the accusative. This would certainly ste• a more leisurely and ceremonious transition than the accusative without a preposition. Bath these sentences, Nocuit Ciceroni, and Lesit Ciceronein, may be translated, "He did harm to Cicero ;" but, in the first, the force of the preposition to" is contained in the dative Ciceroni, and, in the last, it is contained in the verb /xsit.
Thus the verb which governs the accusative is more com pletely prepared for the intended transition than that which governs the dative. This view of the cases is not, we con fess, in the present instance, supported by the comparative brevity of the Latin dative and accusative, which is in fa vour of the dative. It depends for its proof on the use of them in language. Their comparative brevity, however, in the English language, contributes to the illustration of our views, especially as it consists in a difference of the entire word to, and therefore is less liable to be ascribed to accident.
The Latin dative appears, on the whole, to be appro priately employed where the verb has a degree of transi tiveness intermediate betwixt those which govern the ac cusative and those which do not govern any case. The latter may express actions in themselves transitive, though they have not been formed for the purpose of transition, but merely for attaching the accident implied in the verb to the subject mentioned in the nominative. After such verbs the object affected may be introduced, but it re quires, even in the Latin language, an intervening prepo sition ; we say, Lutetiam VEItSUS contendit, and, AD pre hum progressus est.