298. We, were, would and you, when their regular forms would join inconveniently or not at all, may, for the sake of a phrase, be inverted; that is to say, the open or hollow side of the curve may be turned in the opposite direction from ordinary. Illustrations: shall we not

, since you take

there were many

if they would take

Because of the aid furnished by the context, this expedient does not interfere with legibility, and by means of it we secure many useful phrases which would otherwise be impracticable. This inversion is au-thorized by Graham, but not by Benn Pitman.

(As to position of inverted you and your, when beginning a phrase, see Paragraph 303.)

Exercise

299. In each of the following phrases, you, were, would or we is written with the inverted or reversed form:

among you between you ca(n) you never I observe you I send you(I upward) nor you shall we ask shall we be shall we have shall we not shall we say since you since you can since you do since you take should you (should upward) should you decide should you go should you take than you than you expect than you have than you know there were many unless you do unless you take unless you think *we can we ca(n) do we ca(n) have we ca(n) make we ca(n) observe we ca(n) only we ca(n) take we ca(n)not we ca (n) not be we ca(n)not have we ca (n) not say we ca(n)not take we could we could be we could have we could not we could not be we could not have we hope (I. D.) when you when you can when you desire when you discuss when you do when you go when you have when you take when you think which we can which we ca(n)not which we make yet you do yet you know yet you never yet you say you did (I. D.)

*The author, who has for some time practised the joining of the inverted we to can and could, has not experienced in the slightest degree the conflict theoretically apprehended by some writers, between we and what. Those who prefer Mr. Graham's method of expressing we in these cases, where the regular form will not join, will find it explained in Paragraph 121. The verbal combinations we can and we could are so common that some method of effecting a junction seems to be imperatively necessary.

you deny (I. D.)*

you do (I. D.)

you do not (I. D.)

you never think (I. D.)

you thank (I. D.)

you think (I. D.) you had not (I. D.) you know you know that you know them

300. The inversion of were is of course avoided when were is represented by the r hook as in the phrases which were, such were, etc. (See Paragraphs 371-373.) The inversion of would is avoided when would is expressed by half-lengthing, as in they would, it would, etc. (See Paragraphs 467-470.)

"you" used for "your."

301. Your, when its ordinary sign does not make a convenient junction, may be represented by the sign for you, either regular or inverted, preference being given to the regular form, if convenient. This principle is recognized by Munson, not by Graham or Pitman. But the representation of both you and your by the single sign here given was for many years practised in the United States Senate by that distinguished reporter, the late Dennis F. Murphy.

Illustrations: I think your reason

, among your neighbors

Exercise

302. In the following exercise, your is to be represented by the sign for you, regular or inverted, according to convenience:

among your neighbors answer your inquiry ask your father

ask your mother define your duties during your residence

*As ye is never used except in the solemn style of address, there is no danger in colloquial matter of confounding ye and you.

I think your reasons in your name in your position in your testimony it may be your case make your answer make your exit pay your respects read your letter resign your position take your time (tm) take your receipt