The analyses of a text #2

Question

The narrator recalls his adolescence.He visited his old nurse Peggotty's house for her husband Mr. Barkis' impending death and entered Mr. Barkis' bedroom.Mr. Barkis has hoarded his precious things in his secret treasure box which was disguised as a clothes box.For years and years, Mr. Barkis had carried this box, on all his journeys, every day. That it might the better escape notice, he had invented a fiction that it belonged to 'Mr. Blackboy', and was 'to be left with Barkis till called for'; a fable he had elaborately written on the lid, in characters now scarcely legible.He had hoarded, all these years, I found, to good purpose. His property in money amounted to nearly three thousand pounds. Of this he bequeathed the interest of one thousand to Mr. Peggotty for his life; on his decease, the principal to be equally divided between Peggotty, little Emily, and me, or the survivor or survivors of us, share and share alike. All the rest he died possessed of, he bequeathed to Peggotty; whom he left residuary legatee, and sole executrix of that his last will and testament.[David Copperfield by Charles Dickens]1. I'd like to know if "the better" means "much better."2. I'd like to know if "to good purpose" means"for good purpose."3. I'd like to know "in" is omitted before "the principal."4. And I'd like to know why there is "died" before "possessed of."Thank you in advance for your help.

Doctor D · Accepted Answer

Here are my answers:

1) Yes, "the better" can be read as "much better." He was trying to improve on ("better") the secrecy.
The wording is a little awkward. But it is like the more common phrase "the better to." For example:
In the story "Little Red Riding Hood," she remarks on the wolf's big teeth "(What big teeth you have!") and he answers, "All the better to eat you up." Meaning, big teeth make it easier to eat you than small teeth would.

2. No, he does not mean "for a good purpose." He means "successfully." He hoarded successfully (he had a lot of money after years of hoarding).

3. No, "in" is not omitted before "the principal." However, the sentence would be clearer if he added a verb: "The principal was to be divided." In this case, "the principal" means the original amount of money before any interest was earned on it. So the one thousand pounds would earn interest over the years and that interest would be paid to Mr. Peggotty. When Mr. Peggotty died, the original one thousand pounds money would be split three ways.

4. The phrase "died possessed of" is a legal phrase. It refers to whatever a person possessed at the time of his death. So the last sentence could be written: "All the rest of his possessions at the time of his death would go to Peggotty."

I hope this helps.

Park sang joon · Answer

Thank you, Doctor D, for your so very helpful answer.

I hope this helps.

Yes, it much does.
3. I'd like to know to-infintive in place of a clause, as like participle phrases, as in my example

Doctor D · Answer

Please ask this again as a question (you did not actually ask a question).  Also, include the example you want commented on.

Park sang joon · Answer

I'm So sorry for my terrible mistake.

I'd like to know if to-infinitive can be used in place of a clause, as like participle phrases, as in ", the principal to be equally divided between Peggotty,".

Doctor D · Answer

No problem. I just needed to be sure what you were asking. Yes, infinitives can serve the same function as participle phrases when they act as adjectives. However, infinitives also have other functions, most commonly as nouns.

In the example given [the principal to be equally divided between Peggotty], the "to be" infinitive is not being used as an adjective (it looks like it is, but it isn't). That's because the verb is assumed. The real meaning is
The principal is to be equally divided between Peggotty [and others].
To be used as an adjective, you would need a different meaning, such as
The principal to be equally divided between Peggotty [and others] amounts to one thousand pounds in cash.
In this case "the principal" is the noun and "to be equally divided" is the adjective.

I hope this answers your question.

Park sang joon · Answer

Thank you, DoctorD, for your generosity.

I'd like to ask you one more thing.
I think the usage "be to do something" is one of to-infinitive's.
And I was wondering if I can omit "be" in the structure "be to do" as in "I (am) to go to the movie today."

Doctor D · Answer

No, sorry, you cannot omit the "be" because that is the verb (and every sentence needs a verb).

Park sang joon · Answer

Thank you, Doctor D, for your continuing support.

I'm very afraid I'm badgering you, but I'm very curious of this.

In the example given [the principal to be equally divided between Peggotty], the "to be" infinitive is not being used as an adjective (it looks like it is, but it isn't). That's because the verb is assumed. The real meaning is
The principal is to be equally divided between Peggotty [and others].

I was very wondering why "is" could be omitted in my example.

Doctor D · Answer

Let's look at the passage once more. You could read that passage as using "bequeathed" is the governing verb for the whole sentence:
Of this [three thousand pounds] he bequeathed
[1] the interest of one thousand to Mr. Peggotty for his life;
[and]
on his decease,
[2] the principal to be equally divided between Peggotty, little Emily, and me.

However, I think the reader is equally likely to see two separate events:
The first event takes place in the present (mostly). Mr. Peggotty receives the interest on the money right now.
The second event takes place in the future (after Mr. Peggotty's death), when the principal is to be divided.
Looking at the passage this way, you would want a verb for each event. And "is to be divided" is the simplest answer.
So I think the reader would mentally supply the "is" to make sense of the passage.

This may be too long of an answer to your question. Sometimes writers use shortened sentences and rely upon the reader to fill in the blanks.
For example, your friend's dog is running out into the street. You shout, "The dog!" He looks and runs after the dog. He understands that you are actually saying something like "Get the dog!" or "The dog is running away!"

The analyses of a text #2

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions