Expressions like _full of meat_, _good for John_, are by no means instances of the government of adjectives; the really governing words being the prepositions _to_ and _for_ respectively. The most that can be said, in cases like these, is that particular adjectives determine the use of particular prepositions--thus the preposition _of_, generally follows the adjective _full_, &c. s. 495. The positive degree preceded by the adjective more, is equivalent to the comparative form--_e. g._, _more wise_=_wiser_. The reasons for employing one expression in preference to the other, depend upon the nature of the particular word used. When the word is, at one and the same time, of Anglo-Saxon origin and monosyllabic, there is no doubt about the preference to be given to the form in _-er_. Thus, _wis-er_ is preferable to _more wise_. When, however, the word is compound, or trisyllabic, the combination with the word _more_, is preferable. _more fruitful_ _fruitfuller_. _more villanous_ _villanouser_. Between these two extremes, there are several intermediate forms wherein the use of one rather than another, will depend upon the taste of the writer. The question, however, is a question of euphony, rather than of aught else. It is also illustrated by the principle of not multiplying secondary elements. In such a word as _fruit-full-er_, there are two additions to the root. The same is the case with the superlative, _fruit-full-est_. s. 496. The 9th Chapter of Part IV., should be read carefully. There, there is indicated a refinement upon the current notions as to the power of the comparative degree, {406} and reasons are given for believing that the fundamental notion expressed by the comparative inflexion is the idea of comparison or contrast between _two_ objects. In this case, it is better in speaking of only two objects to use the comparative degree rather than the superlative--even when we use the definite article _the_. Thus-- This is _the better_ of the two is preferable to This is _the best_ of the two. This principle is capable of an application more extensive than our habits of speaking and writing will verify. Thus, to go to other parts of speech, we should logically say-- Whether of the two rather than Which of the two. Either the father or the son, but not Either the father, the son, or the daughter. This statement may be refined on. It is chiefly made for the sake of giving fresh prominence to the idea of duality expressed by the terminations _-er_ and _-ter_. s. 497. The absence of inflection simplifies the syntax of adjectives. Violations of concord are impossible. We could not make an adjective disagree with its substantive if we wished. * * * * * {407} CHAPTER IV. SYNTAX OF PRONOUNS.