^r^£\w SB sf^B^ ^3*$ >*> rmmmm E'W-ALD FLflGEL. ' API? 1 1894 PALO ALTO. CAL HISTORY hi i iik ENGLISH LANGUAGE BY T. R. LOUNSBURY Professor oh English in Vai.e University RE r IS ED A. YD E.VLARGED EDITION iNEW YORK HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 1894 • . '.■... Copyright, 1879, 1894, By HENRY HOLT & CO. $■> IX ID \0*T5 L3^X PREFACE TO THE REVISED EDITION. A revised edition of this work has long been desir- able on many accounts ; it has now become indispen- sable for reasons purely typographical. The plates from which the previous impressions have been printed are now thoroughly worn out. The present seemed, therefore, a fitting time to subject the work to a complete revision in the light of changes which experience has shown to be advisable, and of modi- fications and alterations of statement which the advance of knowledge has rendered necessary. This revision has been carried out on so extensive a scale, and so numerous have been the alterations, that, while the old lines have been followed, the work, as a whole, has almost a right to be termed new. There are comparatively few paragraphs which have not been entirely or partially rewritten. Facts have been restated and passages have been rearranged. Matter found in the previous editions has been dis- carded, and new matter, which seemed more perti- nent, has been substituted in its place. Yet, in spite iii 2582.T7 iv Preface to the Revised Edition. of the large number of omissions, so much has been added that the present edition contains above one hundred and fifty pages more than those that have preceded it. There are many other changes which, it is hoped, will conduce to an easier and fuller compre- hension of the subject. Certain points which, as expe- rience has proved, were liable to be misapprehended or overlooked by the reader or student, have been brought out more clearly and prominently. A system of cross-references between the two parts and between the different sections of the second part has been carried through on a somewhat extended scale. A large number of illustrative references and quotations have been added. In the limited field, in fact, which the work sets out to cover, no pains have been spared to make it as complete as possible. The greatest difference, in any single case, between this and the previous editions is in the treatment of the strong verbs in the second part. Still the more important of the changes introduced were introduced on the score of expediency. In this country Sievers's Angels achsische Grammatik, or the Sievers-Cook " Old English Grammar," is the grammar of our earliest speech which is now in widest use. It was therefore deemed better to conform the classification of the strong verbs to that employed in those works, and to bring it in accord with them, a change was made in the number and arrangement previously adopted. In addition, the details belonging to the different classes of strong verbs have been largely brought Preface to the Revised Edition. v together in this edition under each class, and not, as before, distributed under different titles. As regards the subject of nomenclature, I have seen no reason to alter essentially that which was employed in the previous editions. On one point in particular, action has not been taken unadvisedly. I have exam- ined with care everything accessible on the subject, and, I think, nearly everything that has been published, and the more I have read, the less I have been im- pressed with the force of the arguments against the use of the term " Anglo-Saxon." I have therefore re- tained it in this work, as furnishing what is all-impor- tant in nomenclature, a term which, once understood, can never be misunderstood. It is very noticeable that those who are most violently opposed to its use, not unfrequently resort to it when they wish to define with absolute precision what they mean when they apply the term "Old English" to a particular period in the history of the language. There are, indeed, advantages and disadvantages connected with any terminology that may be adopted. It is certainly an argument in favor of the designation as Old English of what is here called Anglo-Saxon, that it makes promi- nent the continuity of our speech. It is an objection to it that, besides the inevitable ambiguity of the epi- thet ' old,' it suggests wrong ideas as to the nature of that continuity. Still it would be folly to attach impor- tance to this particular subject. It is only those who magnify matters of minor consequence that will con- sider the question as one of much moment. I have, vi Preface to the Revised Edition. accordingly, taken pains to furnish the student with a precise account of that other one of the numerous terminologies proposed or used, which is now pre- ferred by many. It is hardly necessary to be observed that this work does not set out to be a treatise on usage. Yet it is inevitable that many questions connected with that subject should come up constantly in a description of the history of inflection. Hence a place is necessarily found in these pages for the ex- planation of the origin of various and varying pecu- liarities of expression, as, for instance, that of double plurals of the nouns like folk and folks, memorandums and memoranda; of participial forms like gotten and got, proved and proven; of phrases and construc- tions such as it is me, you was, he dare, bctiveen you and I, the house is being built, and, in fine, of a long list of locutions, the propriety of which is made a matter of constant contention. So far, in truth, as regards one particular branch of usage, this work may be fairly called complete. There are no anomalous grammatical forms belonging to the speech which are not here recorded, with an account given of their origin. The exact history of these will answer decisively numerous questions of disputed usage which can be answered in no other way. In order to have the work as serviceable as possible in this particular, the indexes have been made exceed- ingly full, wherever points of this kind are concerned. At the same time, in tracing the history of these Preface to the Revised Edition. vii disputed forms and phrases, I have not attempted to lay down what in my opinion ought to be, but simply to point out what is, and how it came to be what it is. My aim has been to furnish a trustworthy guide, to which any one in doubt about the propriety of a par- ticular form can go, with the assurance that he can find accurate and definite information that will enable him to comprehend clearly the arguments for and against its use, and will put him in a position to settle for himself in any given instance on which side the weight of authority lies. On certain points, indeed, the evidence is so entirely one-sided that no course is open save to pronounce an opinion in accordance with it. But this is rarely the fact. Usually the evidence is conflicting, and in such instances the most that can safely be said, in summing up, is that the present tendency of the language is to prefer one of two dis- puted forms or expressions — which is something quite different, however, from saying that the other form or expression is wrong. A scientific treatise has no business to set up as a standard of authority the preferences of particular persons : and in this matter diligent effort has been put forth to separate the facts of language from the fancies, the prejudices, and the theories of individuals, including those of the author himself. It it perhaps desirable, even if not absolutely necessary, to repeat the statement made in the preface to the previous editions, that the division of the history into two parts has involved in some instances viii Preface to the Revised Edition. the necessity of going over the same ground. In no case, however, will this be found to be mere repetition. And, while the second part has been more particularly prepared for the special student, it is hoped that there is nothing in it which will present any difficulty to any reader of ordinary intelligence who cares to investigate the subject. In conclusion, in expressing my obligations to many who have aided me in the revision of this work, I am bound to acknowledge my special indebtedness to my colleague, Prof. Albert S. Cook, who in all cases of doubt and difficulty, especially in connection with the earliest period of the speech, has invariably given me the benefit of his intimate acquaintance with the lan- guage of that time. From many others, too numerous to be mentioned by name, I have received help in this revision, either in the way of suggestion, or of criti- cism. There is, in truth, nothing more encouraging for the future of English scholarship in this country than the existence of so many enthusiastic students of our early language and literature, who are engaged in making special investigations of their own, and who never fail to communicate to those under their instruc- tion a portion of their own zeal. I can ask no better fortune for the revised edition of this work, than that to some slight extent it may In' as helpful to them as the results of their labors have often been to me. T. R. Lounshury. New I [win, Jan. 15, 1894. CONTENTS. INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER. LANGUAGES ALLIED TO THE ENGLISH. PAGE The Indo-European or Aryan Family of Languages. — I. The Indian Branch. — II. The Iranian Branch. — III. The Hellenic Branch.— IV. The Slavonic or Slavo- Lettic Branch. — V. The Celtic Branch. — VI. The Italic Branch. — VII. The Teutonic Branch. — The Semitic Family I PART I. GENERAL HISTORY. CHAPTER I. THE ROMAN AND THE TEUTONIC CONQUEST OF BRITAIN. The Roman Conquest. — The Teutonic Conquest. — Names of the Teutonic Invading Tribes, and Kingdoms founded by them. — Rise of the Kingdom of Wessex . . • 17 ix x Contents. CHAPTER II. THE ANGLO-SAXON LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE. PAGE Language of the Teutonic Invaders. — Differences between Anglo-Saxon and Modern English. — Anglo-Saxon Lit- erature. — Poetry. — Prose. — The Anglo-Saxon Alpha- bet 26 CHAPTER III. INFLUENCE OF FOREIGN TONGUES UPON THE ENGLISH OF THE ANGLO-SAXON PERIOD. The Celtic Element in Anglo-Saxon. — The Latin Ele- ment. — The Scandinavian Element . . . -37 CHAPTER IV. THE NORMAN CONQUEST AND THE FRENCH LANGUAGE IN ENGLAND. The Norman French. — The Norman Conquest. — Effect of the Conquest upon the Native Language. — French and English Languages on English Soil. — Rise in Im- portance of the English. — Loss of the English Pos- sessions in France. — Rise of Mo'dern English Literature. — Debasement of Anglo-Norman French. — General Adoption of English by All Classes . . . .48 CHAPTER V. PERIODS IN THE HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE, AM) THE CHANGES WROUGHT IN IT BY THE NORMAN CONQUEST. The Language before the Conquest. — The Language after the Conquest. — Periods of the English Language. — Contents. xi Literature of the Old English Period (i 150-1350). — Abandonment of Alliterative Verse for Rhyme. — Changes in Grammar between Anglo-Saxon and Middle English. — Changes in Vocabulary. — Losses of Middle English as compared with Anglo-Saxon, in Vocabulary; in Formative Prefixes and Suffixes; in Self-explaining Com- pounds. — Gains of the Language 82 CHAPTER VI. THE THREE DIALECTS OF EARLY ENGLISH, AND THE RISE OF THE MIDLAND. The Three Early English Dialects. — The Northern. — The Midland. — The Southern. — Geographical Limits of these Dialects. — Differences between the Northern and the Southern Dialect, in Spelling; in Grammar; in Vo- cabulary. — Rise of the Midland. — The Scotch Dialect. — Early Scottish Literature . . . . . . 115 CHAPTER VII. CHANGES IN THE MIDDLE ENGLISH PERIOD Counteracting Influences Operating upon Language. — Changes in the Inflection of the Noun; of the Pronoun; of the Adjective; of the Verb. — Failure to Produce Complete Uniformity. — Gains and Losses of the In- flection. — Substitution of Natural for Grammatical Gender 140 xii Contents. CHAPTER VIII. MODERN ENGLISH (1550-). PAGE Few Grammatical Changes. — Confusion of Case in the Pronoun. — Introduction of its. — Transition of be to the Subjunctive. — Substitution of -s for -/// in the Third Person of the Present Indicative Singular. — New Pas- sive Formation. — Additions to the Vocabulary. — Set- tlement of the Orthography. — Wide Extension of English 161 PART II. HISTORY OF INFLECTIONS. CHAFrER I. SOME FEATURES COMMON TO ALL THE TEUTONIC TONGUES. Case. — Number. — Declension. — Vowel I >eclension in o; in i; in u. — Consonant Declension. — Grammatic ( lhange. — Vowel-Variation. — Vowel-< lhange. — Vowel- Modification ......... 193 CHAPTER II. THE NOUN. I. Vowel Declension. — II. Consonant Declension. — Con- fusion of the Inflections. — Assimilation of the Cases. — Irregular Plurals. — Foreign Plurals . . . .209 Contents. xiii CHAPTER III. THE ADJECTIVE. PAGE Indefinite (Pronominal or Strong) Declension. — Definite (Nominal or Weak) Declension. — Loss of the Adjec- tive Inflection. — Comparison. — Double Comparison. — Irregular Comparison ...... 241 CHAPTER IV. THE PRONOUN. The Demonstrative Pronouns. — The Personal Pronouns. — Loss and Confusion of Inflections. — -The Possessive Pronouns. — His as Sign of the Genitive. — -The Reflex- ive Pronouns. — Pronouns of Address. — The Interrog- ative Pronouns. — The Relative Pronouns. — The In- definite Pronouns ........ 256 CHAPTER V. THE VERB. The Teutonic Verb. — General Statements. — Conflict of the Strong and Weak Conjugations. — The Strong Con- jugation. — The Weak Conjugation. — Irregular Verbs of the Weak Conjugation — The Past Participle of the Strong Conjugation. — The Past Participle of the Weak Conjugation. — Number and Person. — Tenses of the Verb. — -The Present Tense, Indicative and Subjunc- tive. — The Preterite of the Weak Conjugation. — The Preterite of the Strong Conjugation. — The Future Tense. — Future-perfect Tense. — The Perfect and Plu- xiv Contents. PAGE perfect. — The Imperative. — The Infinitive Mode. — The Participles. — Passive Formations. — The Preterite- present Verbs. — The Irregular Verbs, do, go, and be . 301 Index to Subjects and Persons 481 Index to Words and Phrases . . . • . . 488 ENGLISH LANGUAGE. INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER. LANGUAGES ALLIED TO THE ENGLISH. The most superficial student of speech is well acquainted with the fact that English is no isolated, independent tongue, but one of the members of a vast family, embracing languages far removed from one another, both in time and in space. This family occupied, at an early period, large districts of Asia, and nearly the whole of Europe; and during the last four hundred years its domain has been extended still farther, over a great portion of the habitable globe. Various names have been employed to designate it as a whole. Of these the ones in most common use are Indo-Germanic, Indo-European, and Aryan, especially the last two. Every one of the Indo-European languages is more or less closely related to every other by the fact of descent from a common mother-tongue. Of this common mother-tongue no literary monuments of i 2 English Language. any sort have been handed down; nor is the place known where it was originally spoken, nor the time when. Its earliest home has, indeed, been ascribed with much positiveness to various regions, both in Asia and in Europe. But for any such special assign- ment there has never been furnished any satisfactory proof; hardly, in fact, anything that can be deemed evidence. This only we can say, that, at some remote periods of the past, members of the race that spoke the primi- tive Indo-European speech, or later descendants of it, parted company from one another, wandered in vari- ous directions, and finally formed permanent settle- ments far apart. Lapse of time and separation in space caused differences to spring up between these dispersed communities, — differences in customs, in beliefs, and, what most concerns us here, in language. The divergences that arose became, in the course of events, so much more important and conspicuous than the resemblances which had been preserved, that, when the scattered races and peoples that had sprung from this one primitive Indo-European tribe appear in recorded history as coming into contact with one another, they are totally unaware of the tie of blood or of speech that subsists between them. Nor was the fact of this relationship established by modern scholars until within the past hundred years. The scientific study which has been carried on in the present century of the languages of the Indo- European family shows that in all branches of it there Languages allied to tJic English. 3 is a certain number of grammatical forms which bear a resemblance to each other so close that the conclu- sion is inevitable that they must have come from a common source. The same assertion can be made as to certain words found in all these tongues, especially personal pronouns, numerals, and nouns denoting the family relation. These are even more than proofs of a common descent. The common existence of these forms and words in languages far apart in space and time makes it clear that they must have belonged to the speech of the primitive Indo-European community before its dispersion into separate ones. From it they must have been transmitted to all its descendants. By a comparison of the forms and words thus pre- served in the derived languages, it has been possible to construct a theoretical primitive language, which is the remote parent of every tongue included in this family. Bound to each other, therefore, by the fact of com- mon descent, all Indo-European tongues necessarily are; but it likewise follows that the relationship ex- isting between some is much closer than that between others. According to the nearness of this relationship among themselves, the languages of the Indo-Euro- pean stock have been divided into the following distinct branches : — I. The Indian. — This embraces the languages of Northern Hindostan. Its great representative is the Sanskrit. In its earliest form this goes back to about two thousand years before the Christian era, and 4 English Language. about three centuries before that epoch, it died out as a spoken tongue. It is the oldest of all the languages of the Indo-European family, and as a whole comes nearest to the primitive speech. II. The Iranian. — This is so called from Iran, the ancient name of the country from Kurdistan to Afghanistan. The two ancient tongues belonging to it are the Persian of the cuneiform or arrow-headed inscriptions, and the so-called Zend, the language of the Avesta, the Bible of the Parsis of Western India. The principal existing representative is the modern Persian, with a literature dating from about the tenth century. III. The Hellenic. — This is so called from the Hellenes, the inhabitants of Hellas, the names by which the Greeks have always designated themselves and their country. This branch includes the ancient Greek, with its various dialects, the /Eolic, the Doric, the Ionic, and in particular the Attic, which became at last the common language. Its existing represen- tative is the Romaic or Modern Greek. IV. The Slavonic, or Slavo-Lettic. —This includes the languages spoken over a large portion of Eastern Europe. Of this branch the Russian is much the most important. The Russian belongs to the Eastern division, of which the most ancient tongue is the Bulgarian. The principal languages of the Western division arc the Polish and the Bohemian. Another group, called the Lettish or Lithuanic, embracing dia- lects spoken about the Baltic, is sometimes reckoned as a distinct branch of the Indo-European family. Languages allied to the English. 5 With none of these has the English any intimate relationship, though from the ancient Greek it has borrowed a moderately large number of words. With the three remaining branches its connections are nearer, though varying in their nature. With the first it has come into close geographical contact ; from the second it has taken full half of its literary vocabu- lary; of the third it is itself a member. V. The Celtic. — This branch was once widely spread over Western Europe; but it is now confined to portions of the British Isles, and to the peninsula of Brittany in North-western France. It is divided into the two following clearly defined groups: — 1st, The Cymric. To this belong the languages or dialects once used throughout the whole of England and Southern Scotland, but now limited to the prin- cipality of Wales, and represented in it by the tongue we call the Welsh. There is one other living tongue besides the Welsh. This is the Breton, spoken in the peninsula of Brittany just mentioned, and sometimes called Armorican from Armorica, the ancient name of that region. This language has a close affinity with the third member of the group, the Cornish, once the speech of the extreme south-west of Great Britain, but which died out entirely in the eighteenth century. 2d, The Gadhelic or Goidelic. Of this group the most important member is the Erse or Irish, the native language of Ireland. Two other tongues belong to it — the Gaelic, spoken in parts of the Scottish 6 English Language. Highlands, and the Manx, spoken by a portion of the population of the Isle of Man. The Celtic tongues are all dying out, in some places slowly, in others rapidly. In the British Isles they are giving way to the encroachments of the English, and in France to that of the French. Lin- guistically they are widely removed from our speech, and, in spite of their geographical nearness, have had no influence worth speaking of on its vocabulary, and none at all on its grammar. VI. The Italic. — The Latin is the great represent- ative of all the ancient languages included in this branch, and is the parent of all the modern ones belonging to it. These latter are collectively called Romanic or Romance. They are descended from the Latin spoken by the common people {lingua Latina rustica), which was in several particulars different from the Latin that has been handed down in liter- ature. Between the two numerous variations early existed, and these continued to increase during the last centuries of the Roman Empire of the West. These differences were in pronunciation, in vocabu- lary, and in inflection. As regards the last, the six cases of the classical Latin were, in this tongue of the common people, largely reduced in number. Forms of the verbs also fell away. Finally from this cor- rupt popular speech were successively developed between the tenth and thirteenth centuries the five literary languages of Western Europe, — the French and the l'rovenral, the Spanish and the Portuguese, Languages allied to tJw English. J and the Italian. The use of French was at first con- fined to Northern France; while Provencal, or the Languedoc, was the speech of the South of that country. The latter, during the twelfth and thir- teenth centuries especially, flourished as a language of literature, and in it was then composed the poetry of the troubadours. But the political preponderance of Northern France carried with it the supremacy of the tongue spoken in it; and the Provencal sank from the position of a cultivated language to that of a dialect. In various parts of South-eastern Europe there also survives a descendant of the Latin, the most impor- tant dialect of which is the Roumanian. This is spoken in the provinces of Wallachia and Moldavia, constituting the present kingdom of Roumania/and also in certain adjacent portions of the Austrian Empire. The vocabulary of this tongue has been largely affected by the languages with which it has come into contact, and especially has there been a large admixture of Slavonic words. During the present century it has begun to attain some promi- nence as a language of literature. Still another descendant of the Latin is a popular speech, which may be roughly described as used by scattered com- munities from Friuli in North-eastern Italy to the Orisons in South-eastern Switzerland. It is broken up into a number of dialects, but is sometimes called as a whole the Ladino. To it is also given the name of Rhseto-Romanic, from the ancient Roman province 8 English Language. of Rhgetia — a term which is often specifically ap- plied to the dialect of it spoken in Switzerland. The influence of the Italic branch upon English has been very great so far as regards vocabulary. This is especially true of the classical Latin and of the French. Italian and Spanish have also con- tributed a limited number of terms. The Latin and Romance elements in our tongue, owing to circum- stances connected with its history, make up fully one-half of the number of words used in literature, though the grammar of Knglish has been but slightly affected by any of the languages of this stock. VII. The Teutonic. — Of this branch, which is termed by some the Germanic, English may be justly called the most important member. As we have no remains of the primitive Indo-European, so we have none of the primitive Teutonic speech, from which all the modern tongues have descended. The branch is now usually divided into two clashes, the East- Germanic and the West-Germanic. Proof of the closeness of the relationship existing between the members of the East-Germanic division has not been made out so clearly as that which exists between the members of the West-Germanic; but the classification now common will be followed here, and in accord- ance with it a detailed description of groups and individual languages will be given. I. To the East-Germanic class belong: — i. The Gothic. -This was the tongue spoken by the Goths who dwelt in the Roman province of Languages allied to the English. 9 Moesia on the Lower Danube. Hence it is some- times called the Moeso-Gothic. It is the eldest of the Teutonic tongues that have handed down memo- rials of their existence, and naturally is much the most ancient in its forms. It stands, indeed, in the same relation to the other members of this branch that the Sanskrit does to all the members of the Indo- European family. Its principal literary monument is only partially preserved. This was a translation of the Bible made in the fourth century into the language of the Goths of Mcesia, by Ulfilas, their bishop. The speech died out in the ninth century, and has left no descendants. 2. The Scandinavian, or Norse. — The oldest rep- resentative of this group is the Old Norse, or, as it is sometimes called, the Old Icelandic. To Iceland it was carried in the ninth century by settlers from Norway, and there gave birth to a brilliant literature. The modern Scandinavian tongues are the Icelandic, the Swedish, the Danish, and the Norwegian. II. To the West-Germanic class belong : — 1. The Hfgh German. — This is so called because originally spoken in Upper or Southern Germany; though the modern literary High German represents as well the tongues spoken in Midland Germany. The history of the dialects belonging to it is divided into three periods. The first is that of the Old High German, extending from the eighth to the twelfth century. The second period is that of Middle High German, extending from the twelfth to the 10 English Language. sixteenth century. Its literature is very abundant in quantity, and rich in quality. The New High German begins with the writings of the reformer Luther, in the fust half of the sixteenth century, especially with his translation of the liible. It is the language of all modern German literature, and is usually termed by us simply the German. Next follows a group of tongues, which as spoken by the dwellers of Northern or Lower Germany, is commonly called the Low Germanic. To this group belong the following : — 2. The Low Frankish, which was spoken princi- pally in the Netherlands, and hence during portions of its history has been called the Netherlandish. It is now represented by the Dutch of Holland, and the Flemish spoken in portions of Belgium. The Flem- ish, as a literary language, is essentially a dialect of the Dutch. 3. The Old Saxon, which may roughly be de- scribed as having been spoken in the region between the Rhine and the Elbe, though not in the extreme North. Its principal monument is a poem of the ninth century, written in alliterative verse, and entitled the Heliand, or 'Healer.' As regards its subject, it is a life of Christ based upon the four gospels. The modern representative of this tongue is the Piatt Deutsch, sometimes called simply Low German. This is the speech of the peasantry of Northern Germany, and extends with decided dialec- tic variations from the Rhine to Lomerania. The Languages allied to the English. 1 1 predominance of High German has prevented any general development of it as a language of literature, but many works have been written in it, among which the poems and tales of Fritz Reuter (1S10-1874) are especially noteworthy. 4. The Frisian, or Friesic, which was spoken in the narrow strip of coast north of the territory occu- pied by the Old Saxon, and in the adjacent islands. It is now much more restricted in space, being limited to a few country districts on the mainland and to a few islands along the coast. Its earliest monuments are a collection of laws, contracts, and official documents which go back no farther than the fourteenth or fifteenth centuries. At the present time it exists only as a popular speech, though attempts have been made of late to cultivate it as a literary language. 5. Closely allied to the Frisian is the Saxon or English, which is the most important of the whole group. In the fifth and sixth centuries it was carried to Great Britain by the Saxons and Angles. There it had a history, and developed a literature pecul- iarly its own. The earliest form of it is commonly designated by modern writers as Anglo-Saxon, or Old English. There are several other families of speech found over the earth, but so far no evidence of relationship has been shown to exist between any of them and the Indo-European. One of the most important of these is the Semitic. It is so called because it was once 12 EiiglisJi Language. assumed that the peoples who spoke the tongues belonging to it were the descendants of Shem, the eldest son of Noah; and for a similar reason the term Japhetic has occasionally been applied to the Indo- European. To the Semitic family belong among others, Assyrian, Syrian, Phoenician, Hebrew, and Arabic. There is still another family called vari- ously the Turanian, or the Tartaric, or the Scythian, which includes among its members the tongues spoken by the Finns, the Hungarians, and the Turks. But though our speech has borrowed words from some of these languages, and from languages belonging to still other families, between it and any one of them no trace of the slightest real connection can be dis- covered. As contrasted with these, English can therefore be spoken of with sufficient accuracy as a member of the Indo-European family of languages. As con- trasted with its numerous related tongues, it is more specifically to be described as a member of the Low Germanic group of the Teutonic branch of that family. Its history, like that of all other tongues, naturally divides itself into two parts. The first embraces what, for lack of a better term, may be called its general history; that is, the account of the circum- stances and conditions under which it developed its present form, of the external agencies that operated upon it, especially of the social and political influ ences that affected it, that modified it, and that, in particular, changed the character of its vocabulary, and Languages allied to the English. 13 transformed it from an inflectional speech into one nearly non-inflectional. The second is the history of the internal changes which took place within the lan- guage itself. It is obvious at a glance that the latter is a far more intricate and extensive subject than the former. It embraces, indeed, a vast variety of sub- jects, the full consideration of any one of which would require a separate volume. This work will treat of so much only of this internal history as is concerned with the variations of form that have taken place in the noun, the adjective, the pronoun, and the verb, caused by change or loss of inflection. Some notice will necessarily be taken, in addition, of the steps which the language has resorted to in order to increase its resources, and to repair the losses it has sustained, either by the development of forms entirely new, or the application of old forms to new uses. This is but a small portion of the immense field which must be covered in any full account of the interior growth and development of our speech; but beyond these limits there will, in this treatise, be no attempt to go. Part I. GENERAL HISTORY. CHAPTER I. THE ROMAN AND THE TEUTONIC CONQUEST OF BRITAIN. The English tongue is at the present time the speech of communities scattered over all the globe; but its history as a language is almost wholly confined to the island of Great Britain. There it was that the violent changes which took place in the social and political condition of the people were indirectly fol- lowed by as violent changes in the character and grammatical structure of the words they spoke. Without an adequate knowledge of the former, no one can gain a satisfactory conception of the latter. The Celts, the Romans, the Saxons, the Northmen, and the French have met or succeeded one another upon British soil; and the occupation of the country by each has left ineffaceable records of itself in the tongue we use to-day. But English was not the original speech of the island. In the modern form in which we know it, it can, indeed, hardly lay claim to a higher age than five hundred years. It is, there- fore, quite as important to understand clearly what English is not, as well as what it is. 17 20 English Language. inhabitants of the island. Even if a few words thus derived can be discovered, there is not perhaps a single one of them that has passed directly from this source over into the English tongue. Traces of the Roman occupation are, indeed, to be found in names of towns. That the -coin of Lincoln is due to colonia is perhaps doubtful ; but the Latin castra, ' camp,' is certainly preserved in the names of a large number of places ending in -caster, -cester, and -Chester, as Lancaster, Worcester, and Winchester. Likewise the word 'street,' which is merely the first word of strata via, ' paved way,' may have come to us in consequence of the Teutonic invaders hearing the term first applied by the Britons to the Roman military roads; but this is doubtful, for the same term appears very early in all the Teutonic dialects. It is possible that one or two other words may have been derived in this way from this source; but it is evident that the Latin of the Roman occupa- tion exercised no appreciable influence upon the English speech properly so called. Still, as the Roman names of towns have been retained to this day, to the words denoting these is often given the title of "Latin of the First Period." The Teutonic Conquest. — Up to this time, English was not known in the island. It was to the Teutonic invasion, which followed soon after the Roman occu- pation ceased, that we owe the introduction of our language into Great Britain, and the gradual dis- placement oi the Celtic tongues. The Teutonic Conquest. 21 The story of this Teutonic invasion and conquest is in many respects obscure and uncertain; but, while numerous details may be mythical rather than histori- cal, the general statement cannot be far from the truth. The common account runs somewhat as fol- lows : Of the western provinces of the Roman Empire, Great Britain was the last to be conquered, the first to be abandoned. Its inhabitants were left, in the first half of the fifth century, exposed to the attacks of the dwellers in the northern part of the island, the Picts and Scots, who had never been really subdued, and whose incursions had always been, from the time of the first conquest, a source of annoyance and alarm. In their extremity the wretched population called for aid upon certain Teutonic tribes dwelling upon the north coast of Germany. It was by these the English language was brought into Great Britain; for the new auxiliaries did not long remain contented with the limited territory which had been assigned them, but, soon turning their arms against their allies, ended at last in conquering the country they came to save. This invasion is said to have begun about the middle of the fifth century. It is more than prob- able, to be sure, that, previous to this time, Teutonic bands had made marauding descents upon the coast; it is not impossible that they had formed scattered settlements. About the end of the fourth century one of the Roman military officers stationed in Britain was styled "Count of the Saxon Frontier" {Coi/ics Limitis Saxonici per Britanniam); and his jurisdic- 22 English Language. tion extended from the Wash to Southampton. This stretch of coast may have been called the Saxon Frontier because Saxons inhabited it: the more reasonable assumption is that it was so called because the Saxons molested it. Names of the Teutonic Invading Tribes, and King- doms founded by them. — The Teutonic invaders were Low Germans, and belonged to three tribes, — the Jutes, the Saxons, and the Angles. According to the dates furnished by the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Hengist and Horsa came over in 449 with a body of Jutes, and subsequently founded the kingdom of Kent. They also occupied the Isle of Wight. In 477 ^Ella landed near the present city of Chichester, and founded the kingdom of the South Saxons, or Sussex. This, roughly speaking, includes the present counties of Surrey and Sussex. In 495 Cerdic came over, and in 519 founded the kingdom of the West Saxons, or Wessex. This by successive conquests came finally to include nearly all South-west England, with a portion of the country north of the upper waters of the Thames. There were also Saxons north of the Thames, occupying the present counties of Essex and Middlesex. Sussex, Wessex, and Kssex are usually spoken of as the three Saxon monarchies. There were likewise kingdoms founded by the Angles. Their collective territory embraced much the larger part of Great Britain, but their origin is wrapped in even deeper obscurity than that of the others. The largest of The Teutonic Conquest. 23 these was the kingdom of Northumbria, which extended from the Humber to the Forth, and conse- quently included the greater portion of the Scottish Lowlands. We know nothing of its early history. The establishment of its monarchy is ascribed to the year 547, under which date the Anglo-Saxon Chroni- cle states that " Ida came to the throne, from whom sprang the royal race of the Northumbrians." It was frequently divided into the two kingdoms of Deira and Bernicia. The former extended from the Hum- ber to the Tees, and was about the same as the present county of York. The latter stretched from the Tees to the Frith of Forth. Besides Northumbria, there was the kingdom of East Anglia, which included the modern Norfolk and Suffolk (the Nor tit -folk and the South-folk), and parts of other counties. The last Anglian kingdom to be formed was that of Mercia, — the "March," or fron- tier. This in process of time came to be one of the largest, and to embrace most of the central counties of England. These seven monarchies are often popularly but loosely spoken of as the Heptarchy. From the account just given, it appears that the Teutonic conquest of Great Britain was chiefly the work of two tribes, — the Saxons and the Angles. It further appears that the former settled mainly in the southern part of the island; while the latter occupied the centre and north of England and the Lowlands of Scotland. The Angles had a marked superiority, both in their numbers, and in the extent of territory 24 EnglisJt Language. &"""' ^"*'s m *S i they occupied. When, therefore, any characteristic differences that may have originally existed between the tribes began to disappear, and the two peoples blended in one, it is no matter of wonder that the name of the larger body should be taken to designate the country the two possessed in common. Englisc, 'English,' was the title usually given, after the ninth century, to the race and language. Englaland (con- tracted, England), ' land of the Angles, ' came later to be the name applied to the whole country from the Channel to the Frith of Forth. But, though the Angles were the more numerous, the Saxons seem to have been the first to come into contact with the native population; for it was the title which the conquered race gave to all the invaders. Even to this day, to the Celtic inhabitant of the British Isles, whether Cymric or Cadhelic, the Eng- lishman is not an Englishman, but a Saxon or Sassenach. It is not improbable, therefore, that this tribe made the earliest marauding descents upon the entire length of coast. On the other hand, the invaders spoke of the native population sometimes as Britons, sometimes as Welsh (A. S. Welisc, IVc/sc, 'foreign,' from A. S. II hi///, a 'foreigner '). Rise of the Kingdom of Wessex. — The conquest of the country was no rapid or easy task. The native population resisted fiercely, and gave way slowly. Every accession of territory was gained at the cost of hard fighting. Still, under incessant attacks, the Britons were steadily, though slowly, pashed back The Teutonic Conquest. 25 towards the western shore of the island ; and at the beginning of the ninth century the portion of country directly under their sway was limited to the present county of Cornwall (West Wales), to the present principality of Wales (North Wales), and to a strip along the north-western coast of England and south- western coast of Scotland. But the invaders were not only constantly fighting the native Celtic inhabitants, they were as constantly engaged in hostilities among themselves. As a result, the size and the number of the various kingdoms they founded were constantly changing. With the acces- sion, however, in 802, of Egbert to the throne of Wessex, the kingdom of the West Saxons became the ruling one, — a supremacy which it never after lost. Before the death of that monarch, which took place in 839, his authority was acknowledged by all the invaders that had settled in Great Britain, and was submitted to by the people of West and of North Wales. In the following century, during the reigns of Edward the Elder (901-925) and Athelstan (925- 940), the son and grandson of Alfred the Great (871- 901), the power of the house of Wessex became permanently established over the whole island; and the kings of that line were recognized as immediate lords of all the English inhabitants, and as superior lords of all the Celtic. At this point the Teutonic conquest of Britain may be said to have been fully achieved. CHAPTER II. THE ANGLO-SAXON LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE. Language of the Teutonic Invaders. — Up to the accession of Egbert, the speech of the Teutonic invaders of Britain, while doubtless the same essen- tially, was broken up into a number of dialects. None of these, except, possibly, the Northumbrian, possessed what we should term a literature. The Latin charters of the early kings in several places make distinct mention of the dialect of Kent; but in that no literary work of any extent was then com- posed, or, if composed, it has not been handed down in its original form. Still the few monuments of the early speech that have been preserved enable us to recognize, before the end of the eighth century, the existence of four principal dialects. Two of them are Anglian — the Mercian and the Northumbrian, which were spoken throughout the region north of the Thames to the furthest limit of the Teutonic occu- pation of what is now Scotland. The other two, spoken mainly south of the Thames, were the West- Saxon and the Kentish. It is not likely that any one of these four dialects jessed originally any authority outside of its own 26 Anglo-Saxon Languagt and Literature. 2J district. With the accession, however, of the royal house of Wessex to the rule of Teutonic England, this condition of things underwent a change. Linguistic supremacy, other things being equal, is sure to follow political : the dialect of Wessex, accordingly, became the cultivated language of the whole people, — the language in which books were written and laws were published. During the reign of Alfred (871-901) it began to develop a literature, which, before the Norman Conquest, attained no slight proportions. It is in this West-Saxon dialect that nearly all the exist- ing monuments of our earliest speech were composed, or, it would be more correct to say, have been pre- served. Still, besides these, we have extant a few interlinear glosses — that is, translations inserted between the lines — written in the language of North- umbria, the parent tongue of the present dialects of the North of England and of the Scottish Lowlands. The language of the Teutonic invaders was origi- nally called by them Saxon or English, according as they themselves were Saxons or Angles. It continued, even down to the eleventh century, to be thus vari- ously designated in their own Latin writings. Still the superiority of the Angles, arising from vastly greater numbers, from larger territory, and perhaps from an earlier cultivation of literature, eventually, and to all appearance speedily, made the name belonging to them predominant. It survived the decay of their political power. Though the kings of the West Saxons attained to the supremacy; though 2 8 English Language. Winchester, the West-Saxon capital, became the capi- tal of the whole country; though the West-Saxon dialect became the language of all who wrote, the name applied both to the race and the tongue was usually Englisc, that is, 'English.' From the ninth century on, it is the only term applied to it by those who wrote in it. When, in the sixteenth and seven- teenth centuries, a revival of the study of our early speech took place, it was sometimes called Saxon, sometimes English-Saxon, and sometimes Anglo- Saxon. The last designation, as recognizing the names of the two principal invading tribes, has been until recently the one generally adopted. By many it is now styled Old English. In this work Anglo- Saxon will be used to mark a period in the history of the English language extending from 450 to 1150, or nearly a century after the Norman Conquest; and, when employed without limitation, will designate that dialect of it called specifically the West-Saxon. As an equivalent phrase, "English of the Anglo-Saxon period " will also be used. Differences between Anglo-Saxon and Modern Eng- lish. — Both in grammar and in vocabulary Anglo- Saxon differed widely from Modern English. It was what, in the technical language of grammarians, is called a synthetic language; that is, a language, like the Latin, which expresses by changes in the form of the words themselves, the modifications of meaning they undergo, and their relations to one another in the sentence. It had two principal de< tensions of Anglo-Saxon Language and Literature. 29 the noun, with several subordinate declensions under one of them. 1 It had two declensions of the adjective, according as its substantive was to be represented as definite or indefinite. 2 It had a distinct form for four cases in the substantive. It had two leading conjuga- tions of the verb, with subordinate conjugations under each. 3 As a necessary accompaniment of this fulness of inflection, it possessed in comparison with the present tongue, a somewhat complicated syntax. On the other hand, Modern English is what is called an analytic language. The relations of ideas which were once expressed by termination and inflection are now, with the disappearance of these, expressed, instead, by the use of prepositions and their cases, and by the arrangement of words in the sentence. Still the grammatical structure, what there is left of it, is purely Teutonic. Even more marked is the difference between the ancient and the modern tongue in the vocabulary. A vast number of words belonging to the Anglo-Saxon no longer exist for us, even in a changed form. The places of these have been supplied by borrowing from other languages, especially from Latin and French. This has been carried on to an extent which, if vocabulary alone were considered, would make it doubtful whether our tongue is Teutonic or Romanic. Anglo-Saxon Literature. — Poetry. — The Teutonic invaders were originally heathen, and no written 1 See Part II. sees. 24, 25, and 27. 2 lb. sees. 69-73. 3 lb. sees. 152-156. 30 English Language. literature existed among them before their conversion to Christianity. 'This took place in the seventh century. Of the dialects of Anglo-Saxon, the West- Saxon is the only one that has handed down produc- tions of any literary value, though many and perhaps most of them were pretty certainly composed origi- nally in the Northumbrian. They consist of a number of works, both in prose and poetry. The latter, as in all early literatures, was much the more important, and presents a marked contrast, alike in character and construction, to the verse of later times. Its distinguishing peculiarity, as regards form, was, that it was alliterative; that is to say, it depended, not upon final rhyme, nor upon regularity of accent, nor upon the existence of a fixed number of syllables in the line, but upon the fact that a certain number of the more important words in the same line began with the same letter. According to the usual, though not invariable, arrangement, two principal words in the first section of the line, and one in the second section, began with the same letter, if a consonant. If words beginning with vowels were employed, the vowels were not required to be the same. Unaccented prefixes were not regarded, as the ge in ge-wat of the following illustration of this method of versification: — Ge-«/at ]>a ofer ze/aeg-holm ze/inde ge-fysed ^lota/amig-heals '/ugle gellcost. //'cut thru nvcr the sea a/ave, wind-impelled, The ioat with Aow of foam, likest a /ird. Anglo-Saxon Language and Literature. 31 As regards subject, Anglo-Saxon poetry was mainly of a religious character. To a large extent it con- sisted of versifications of the narratives contained in the Bible, and of legends of saints and martyrs. Still its most important work is the epic of "Beowulf," which celebrates the deeds of a Scandinavian hero of that name. This exists in only a single imperfect manuscript of the tenth century; but the original com- position of the poem is thought by many to go back to the period before the conversion of the people to Christianity. The next most important work is a version of some of the Bible narratives, generally attributed to Caedmon, a Northumbrian monk who flourished in the middle of the seventh century. But if these were his composition, they have not been preserved in the form in which they were written; for it is not in the Northumbrian, but in the West-Saxon dialect that they now exist. Another poet of this early period is Cynewulf, who probably flourished about the close of the eighth century, and in the early part of the ninth. The whole of Anglo-Saxon poetry which is extant amounts to about thirty thousand lines, and a large proportion of it has been preserved in two volumes. One of them is the Codex Exoniensis, or Exeter Book,— a collection which is supposed to be the one mentioned among the gifts made in the eleventh century to St. Peter's monastery in Exeter by Bishop Leofric. It is there spoken of as "a large English book of various matters composed in song-wise " 3 2 English Language. {mycel Englisc hoc be gehwylcum fringum on leodwlsan geworht). The other is the Codex Vercellensis, — a collection found in 1822 at Vercelli in Northern Italy. Prose. — The language of Anglo-Saxon poetry stands at the farthest possible remove from that of daily life. It constantly repeats the same ideas in slightly vary- ing phrases; it uses numerous compound words pecul- iar to itself; the construction of its sentences is often involved and intricate, and the meaning in consequence obscure; and through it all, with a certain grandeur, there is joined a certain monotony from the little range of thought or expression found in it. On the other hand, Anglo-Saxon prose is for the most part exceedingly simple in its construction. It may be said to begin with King Alfred, who is, indeed, its most prominent author. Like the poetry, its subject-matter is mainly religious, and to a large extent it is made up of translations from the Latin. Still two of its most important monuments are purely original, and remain of especial value to the present day. ( )ne of these is a collection of the laws of vari- ous kings. The other is a series of annals called the "Anglo-Saxon Chronicle," in which the events of each year arc recorded under that date. Of this work one manuscript extends down to the death of King Stephen in 1 154. Anglo-Saxon prose is of great interest from a linguistic point of view: as literature, it is, in general, dull beyond description. The following specimen of Anglo-Saxon prose is Anglo-Saxon Language and Literature. 33 taken from the account given to King Alfred by Ohthere, one of his Norse subjects, and inserted by the former into his translation of the History of Paulus Orosius, a Spanish priest of the fifth century. In the interlinear gloss the modern forms of the Anglo-Saxon words are, when not used, placed in parentheses: and some of the words not found or implied in the Anglo-Saxon, but employed in the gloss, are placed in brackets. Ohthere saide his hlaforde, ^Elfrede cyninge, 8set Ohthere said to his lord, King Alfred, that he ealra NorSmonna norftmest bude. He cwseS ftset he of all Northmen northmost dwelt. He said (quoth) that he bude on Ssem lande nonSvveardum wiS Sa West-see. he dwelt in the land northward along (with) the West-sea. He siede, freah, Sset Sset land sle swifie lang nor5 Sonan ; He said, though, that that land is very long north thence; ac hit is eall weste,buton on ■feawum stowum styccemeel- but it is all waste, except (but) in a few places, [where] here and um wiciaS Finnas, on huntoSe on wintra, ond on sumera there dwell Finns, for (in) hunting in winter, and in summer on fiscafie be Siere ste. He siude Sset he, set sumum for (in) fishing along (by) that sea. He said that he, at a certain (some) cirre, wolde fandian hu longe 8aat land time, wished (would) to find out by trial how long the land norSryhte kege ; o85e hwaefter eenig monn be norSan due north lay; or whether any man north of flaim westenne bude. pa for he norSryhte be Stem the waste dwelt. Then went (fared) he due north along (by) the lande : let him ealne weg '5aet weste land on ftget land: [he] left all [the] way the waste land on the steorbord, ond 8a wlds* on Sast bsecbord, ]>rie dagas. starboard, and the wide-sea on the larboard three days. 34 English Laiiguage. pa waes he swa feor norcS swa (Sa hwaelhuntan firresi: Then was he so far north as the whale-hunters farthes' faraS. pa for he faglet norSryhte, swa feor go (fare). Then went (fared) he still (then yet) due north, so far swa he meahte on 5sem otSrum ] rim dagum gesiglan. as he might in the second (other) three days sail. It will be observed that in the extract just given two letters occur which are no longer in use. Here, therefore, it will be desirable to give a brief account of the relation of the Anglo-Saxon to the Modern English alphabet. The characters used by the Teu- tonic tribes, when they first came over, were Runes. After their conversion to Christianity, they abandoned these for the Roman alphabet, as its letters had been modified by the Britons. To this alphabet they added two Runes. One of them was v, which hardly lasted beyond the Anglo-Saxon period. Its place was early taken by the doubled //, and these two united form the letter w. The other Runic letter was |>. This probably indicated the two sounds of th seen in thin and then, breath and breathe. There was another letter also, which in its origin is nothing but a crossed d, and is represented by the form , and indicated the same sounds. Both of these characters are represented in Modern English by the digraph th. They went largely out of use in the fifteenth century, and after the introduction of printing were universally abandoned. But the close resemblance in writing of A the so-called thorn- Anglo Saxon Language and Literature. 35 letter, to >' renders it frequently difficult to distinguish the one from the other in the manuscripts. Later the two came to be practically similar, and not only in early writing but in early printing the, that, and a few other words appeared in the form of abbreviations y e , y', and the like. In ye, which in the sense of 'the' is still occasionally found in imitations or supposed imitations of the archaic style, the y really represents the Anglo-Saxon Rune \, and is properly pronounced as th. As compared with the present English alphabet, the Anglo-Saxon presents certain other variations. There is no distinct form for /from i ; and though k, q, and z occur at times in the manuscripts, they did not represent sounds then, any more than now, which were not already represented by other letters, or by combinations of letters. The use of k for c became much more common after the Conquest. Another character, 3, in common use during the Old and Middle English periods, was, in its origin, the Roman g as modified by the British scribes. It represents the modern y or g at the beginning of a word, and gh at the end, as j><», 'ye,' 3eve, 'give,' and inoi/j, 'enough.' This character disappeared also after the introduction of printing. During the middle ages the letters of the Roman alphabet were changed into a variety of forms by the ingenuity of the monastic scribes; and the peculiar modification of this alpha- bet used in England is called black-letter. During the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries books were reg- 36 English Language. ularly printed in black-letter; but, in the first half of the seventeenth century, it was generally given up for the clearer, original Roman characters from which it had been taken. CHAPTER III. INFLUENCE OF FOREIGN TONGUES UPON THE ENGLISH OF THE ANGLO-SAXON PERIOD. Down to the time of the Norman Conquest the Anglo-Saxon form of the English language remained essentially the same. The grammatical modifications, in particular, that it underwent, were comparatively few in number, and slight in importance. Some inflections were lost. Cases of nouns, adjectives, and pronouns, which originally possessed different endings, came to have the same. The tendency of verbs of the strong conjugation to pass over to the weak 1 began even thus early to show itself. Still none of these changes were violent or extensive : all of them took place in accordance with the natural law of development. But during this period the lan- guage came into contact with three other tongues, which to some extent affected the vocabulary, and perhaps, also, the form of expression. These were, first, the speech of the native Celtic inhabitants; secondly, the Latin; and, thirdly, the Norse. Of i See pages 153, 154. 37 o rework 38 English Language. these, Latin was the only one which at that time added any appreciable number of words to the lan- guage of literature. Terms from the Celtic or the Norse may have been adopted into the colloquial speech; but it was not until the break-up of the classic Anglo-Saxon, which followed the Norman Conquest, that they occur to any extent in writing. Celtic. — The native inhabitants found by the Teu- tonic invaders in the part of Britain they overran belonged to the Cymric branch of the Celtic stock. As the conquest was the work of several hundred years, it might be supposed that the vocabulary of each people would have received large accessions from that of the other. Such, however, was not the case. Very few Celtic terms are found in Anglo-Saxon lit- erature; and not many, indeed, appear to have made their way into written English in the centuries imme- diately following the coming of the Norman-French. This was largely due to the little intercourse that pre- vailed between the two races and the feelings of hatred developed by long years of war. The fact that the native inhabitants were Christians, and the invaders heathen, tended also to widen the breach between them; but, even after the conversion of the Anglo- Saxons, religious differences came in to impart addi- tional bitterness to the hostility that sprang from political and military conflicts. Bede, writing in the earlier half of the eighth century, says, that in his day it was not the custom of the Britons to pay any respect to the faith and religion of the English, or to corre- Celtic Element in English. 39 spond with them any more than with pagans. In consequence, very few of the Celtic words in our speech go back to a very early date. Certainly the modern importations from that quarter far exceed in number the earlier ones. Moreover, they have gen- erally come to us from the Gadhelic branch, and not from the Cymric 1 : and in most cases they denote objects peculiar, or originally peculiar, to the race by which they were first employed. The words bard, brogue, 'shoe,' claymore, druid, plaid, shamrock, whiskey, for illustration, are all of Celtic origin; but none of them existed in the English of the Anglo- Saxon period, and most of them are of comparatively recent introduction. It is natural that Celtic names of places should be much more common, and of these many continue to exist in the speech of to-day. The Celtic avon, meaning 'river,' and esk, meaning 'water, ' are still found as the appellation of several streams of Great Britain. The Cymric pen and the Gadhelic ben, both meaning 'head,' and hence a 'peak,' occur with a good deal of frequency as part of the names of moun- tains. Numerous other Celtic words can be detected in place-names, such, for instance, as strath, 'a broad valley,' in Strathclyde, tre, 'a village,' in Tredegar, and probably tin, 'a deep pool,' in Lincoln. Names of persons are, as might be expected, even more nu- merous than names of places. There is an old English saying which runs as follows : — 1 See page 5. 4veiti, a 'clearing'). Examples can be seen in Whitby, Althorp, Lowestoft, and Braithwaite. There was, accordingly, no slight infusion of the Scandinavian element in the population that inhabited Britain. But the extent of Scandinavian influence upon the language is difficult to ascertain. This is due to the fact that the Old Norse and the Anglo- Saxon are both Teutonic tongues. As they both de- scended from a common ancestor, it was natural that a large number of words should be the same, or nearly the same, in both. Furthermore, it is not conceivable that all the vocabulary possessed by either has been handed down in the literature of each that has been saved. When, therefore, a word occurs in Modern English which is not found in Anglo-Saxon, or any other Low German tongue, but is found in Old Norse, we can say that there is every probability that it came from the latter. Still we cannot say this with certainty, for it may have existed in the former, and not have been preserved. There is, moreover, a special difficulty in this ques- tion, from the fact that it was in the Anglian king- doms that these foreign settlements were made. But 4.6 English Language. the existing remains of Northumbrian speech, which is an Anglian dialect of the Anglo-Saxon, show plainly that this dialect was much more closely allied to the Old Norse than is the West-Saxon, which is a Saxon dialect of Anglo-Saxon. In the last-named the infinitive of the verb, for illustration, regularly ends in -an. In the other two the -// is dropped. In West-Saxon "to tell' is tettan ; in Northumbrian it is tella : in Norse it is telia. It is, therefore, quite conceivable, though it may not be very probable, that words and forms which we ascribe to the Scandina- vian element may, in fact, have not come from it, but from the speech of the Anglian population; for we have no such extensive vocabulary of the Northum- brian dialect as we have of the West-Saxon. Still there is no doubt that a large number of Norse words were introduced at this time into the spoken tongue. Many of these have spread beyond their original limits, and linger to this day in the local dialects of Northern England and Southern Scotland. In these dialects, indeed, this foreign element is far more conspicuous than in the language of literature. Still, in regard to the latter also, it is reasonable to suppose that both Norse words, and Norse meanings of words, in many cases, have supplanted those, which, up to the time of its introduction, had been the prevailing or exclusive ones in Anglo-Saxon. For illustration, sindon was the ordinary form for the plural of the present tense of the verb be: its place is now supplied by are, the original of which Scandinavian Element in English. 47 is rare in Anglo-Saxon, but the regular form in the Norse. So from the Norse kalla we seem to get our verb call; for in Anglo-Saxon the corresponding word is clipian, 'to clepe.' Again, the word dream is common to both tongues; but in Anglo-Saxon it means 'joy,' 'music'; and it is from the Norse that we have taken the modern signification. Still it was not till the break-up of the native speech, that fol- lowed upon the Norman Conquest, that Norse words came to be used to any extent in the language of lit- erature. CHAPTER IV. THE NORMAN CONQUEST AND THE FRENCH LANGUAGE IN ENGLAND. Up to the middle of the eleventh century the influ- ences that had been at work upon the language had not been productive of great changes ; still less were they revolutionary in their nature. The Norsemen for a time brought ruin everywhere ; but whether they desolated temporarily, or settled permanently, they did not anywhere materially disturb the native speech as an instrument of communication, or affect in the slightest its literary supremacy. Even during the time their kings ruled the country, they seem not to have made any effort to introduce into it the use of their own tongue. But a series of events was now to take place which completely changed the future political history of the English people ; and it was attended by as pro- found and wide-reaching a change in the character of English speech. In the latter half of the eleventh century came the Norman Conquest and the introduc- tion into the island of the French as the language of the higher classes. The most powerful effects upon the native tongue 48 The Norman-French. 49 produced by these two agencies did not fully show themselves until three centuries had passed ; but a very early and almost immediate effect wrought upon it was to throw it into a state of confusion. The English of the Anglo-Saxon period sank at once from its position as the language of culture, whatever that culture was. When, in the fourteenth century, it once more reappears as the language of a classic literature, it is a language and literature widely different from that which had been supplanted or degraded by the coming of a stranger race. From the Norman Conquest on, the native speech no longer followed the natural law of development which it would have followed as a pure Teutonic tongue. To explain the nature of the changes that were wrought in it, it will be necessary to give some account of the men whose coming caused them, and of the relations which for a long time existed on English soil between the French and English languages. The Norman-French. — Toward the close of the ninth century a band of Northmen, under a renowned leader named Rolf, or Rollo, sailed up the Seine, cap- tured Rouen, and, from that point as a centre, carried on a continuous and destructive war with the native inhabitants. At last, in 912, peace was made. To the invaders, Charles the Simple, the king of the French, ceded a large territory bordering upon the British Channel, which was called from them Normandy. On the other hand, Rollo agreed to become the feudal vassal of the French monarch, and to embrace the 50 English Language. Christian religion. These conditions were fully carried into effect. The Norsemen, in consequence, became the undisturbed owners of the district given up to them, and, along with the religion of their subjects, they also adopted their language. The Norman Conquest. — The relations between the English and the Norman-French courts began to assume about the beginning of the eleventh century a somewhat close character by the marriage, in 1002, of the Anglo-Saxon king, Ethelred II., to Emma, sister of Richard III., the fifth duke of Normandy. One of the children of this union was a son, Edward, who is usually styled the Confessor. He reigned over Eng- land from 1043 to 1066. But the early years of this prince were spent at the court of his uncles Richard and Robert, dukes of Normandy ; and when, after the termination of the Danish dynasty in 1042, he was recalled to his native country, and placed upon the throne, he continued to retain a preference for the friends and the tastes of his youth. Norman-French noblemen were assigned positions of responsibility and power; Norman-French priests were made English bishops. It is true, a revolution in 1052 drove out most of the foreign favorites ; but the foreign influ- ence could not have passed away utterly. Early in 1066 Edward the Confessor died ; and Harold, the most powerful nobleman in the kingdom, was chosen king in his stead. A claim to the throne was immedi- ately made, however, by William, Duke of Normandy, a cousin of the deceased monarch. To support it, he The Norman Conquest. 5 l invaded England in the autumn of the same year ; and the battle of Hastings, fought on the 14th of October, 1066, resulted in the defeat and death of Harold and the subjection of the whole country. Effect of the Conquest upon the Native Language. — Two general facts in regard to language become ap- parent as the effect of the Conquest. One is, that, though the native tongue continued to be spoken by the great majority of the population, it went out of use as the language of high culture. It was no longer taught in the schools. It was no longer employed at the court of the king, or the castles of the nobles. It was no longer used in judicial proceedings ; to some extent even it ceased to be recognized in the services of the church. This displacement was probably slow at first ; but it was done effectually at last. The second fact is, that, after the Conquest, the educated classes, whether lay or ecclesiastical, preferred to write either in Latin or in French ; the latter steadily tending to become more and more the language of literature as well as of polite society. We have, in consequence, the singular spectacle of two tongues flourishing side by side in the same country, and yet for centuries so utterly distinct and independent, that neither can be said to have exerted much direct appreciable influence upon the other, though in each case the indirect in- fluence was great. To understand the relations between these two tongues involves an acquaintance with the relations existing between the two races that spoke them ; and 52 Engl is Ji Language. in both cases the knowledge we have, especially of the earlier period, is obscure. Our information, indeed, in regard to our speech, is based almost exclusively upon incidental notices contained in the Latin chronicles written in the twelfth century and in the beginning of the thirteenth. In these the subject of language is rarely treated of specifically, and never at any length. Accordingly, the inferences that are drawn can be looked upon only as probable, and not as certain. From the latter part of the thirteenth cen- tury on, the native tongue is more an object of con- sideration in itself, and our knowledge of the relations between French and English becomes much more positive and precise. A few of the more important statements will be quoted ; but in every case it is necessary to bear in mind, not only what was said, but when it was said. The estimate entertained of the language would in- evitably be affected by the estimate entertained of the people who spoke it. It was natural that a contempt- uous feeling should exist at first on the part of the con- querors towards the conquered. Though little evidence has been handed down, such certainly seems to have been the case. One early authority on this point has now indeed been set aside. Up to a comparatively late period, the History which purported to be written by [ngulph, appointed Abbot of Croyland in 1076, was re- garded as authentic, and ils statements were implicitly < 1 edited. In this work it was asserted, that, after the accession of William, the English race was held in The Norman Conquest. 53 contempt and detestation ; that the Normans so ab- horred the language, that the laws of the land and the decrees of the king were put into Latin ; and that in the schools the elements of grammar were imparted in French. Though this History was professedly the production of a contemporary of the Conqueror, there is no doubt that much, if not all, of it, was a forgery of the fourteenth century. Its statements, therefore, are of no weight as belonging to the period in which the work purports to have been written. Yet a certain value may be fairly deemed to attach to them, as embodying the opinion which had become currently accepted in later times as to the views that then were supposed to have prevailed after the Conquest about the English race and language. Still there is direct evidence that contempt was both felt and expressed by the foreigners for the native population. Henry of Huntingdon, who flourished in the former half of the twelfth century, in speaking of the state of the country at the death of William the Conqueror, asserted that it was a disgrace to be even called an Englishman. This is a state of feeling that would of necessity pass away rapidly with the descend- ants of the conquerors, who had made England their permanent home ; but it would as certainly continue to exist with those subjects of the English king who belonged by birth and family ties to the Continent. Evidence of the prevalence of this sentiment on their part can be found late in the twelfth century. William de Longchamp, Bishop of Ely, was left as guardian 54 English Language. of the realm by Richard I. (i 1S9-1 199), when setting out on his crusade. This minister is asserted to have felt and expressed the utmost contempt for the people he was called upon to govern. He was utterly igno- rant of the English tongue. He so despised the race which spoke it that usual forms of imprecation were such as these : " May I become an Englishman if I do this ! " " I were worse than an Englishman were I to consent to this." Feelings of this kind would be certain to extend to the language. Still there is no evidence that any at- tempt was made at any time to prevent the employment or check the growth of the popular speech. In truth, the ecclesiastical historian, Ordericus Vitalis (1075- 1144), tells us, that William the Conqueror strove to make himself acquainted with it, so as to deal with his subjects without the aid of an interpreter ; and his lack of success was not due to indifference, but to advancing age and want of leisure. It is indeed the belief of many that his son, Henry I., who reigned from 1100 to 1 135, made himself master of the English language. But if he did, it is not likely that his example found many imitators. The tongue of the common people was, in truth, in the eyes of the Norman a barbarous one. He made not the slightest attempt to destroy it: he contented himself with simply despising it. To him it was the rude speech of a rude people which had been subjected to the sway of a superior race. French and English Languages on English Soil. — English, indeed, after the Conquest, did not cease to French and Englisli in England. 55 be a written language : it did cease to be a cultivated one. None of those conservative influences were cast about it which are sure to prevent rapid and radical changes in any tongue that is regularly employed by the educated. But the great body of the people clung to it. They were ignorant, and they corrupted it ; but, as they could not or would not learn the language of the higher classes, they preserved it. While French, therefore, continued to remain for centuries the tongue employed in polite conversation ; while it and Latin were the ones mainly employed in literature, the native speech could not and did not fail, as time went on. to make its influence more and more felt by the mere weight of numbers on the part of those using it. It has been an assertion frequently made that the nobility did not learn to speak English till the four- teenth century. The statement may be true to this extent, that the subjects of the English king who were born and brought up on the Continent, and spent there much of their lives, never learned to speak it at all. But it is against all probability that those members of the higher classes who were natives of the island, whose interests mainly lay there, whose lives were largely passed there, should not have been able to understand and make use of the speech of the great body of the common people with whom they came into daily contact. From the very first, necessity would have forced them at times to employ English, even if French were the language of their choice. 56 Engl is Ji Language. There is indeed ample reason to believe that by the end of the thirteenth century English had become the mother-tongue of the children of the nobility dwelling in England, and that it was through the medium of it they acquired largely their knowledge of French. Several copies of a widely circulated text-book then prepared for their instruction in the latter language are still in existence. 1 It contains French sentences, with an interlinear translation in English. This certainly indicates that the child learned invariably the native speech in infancy, and was then made to acquire the speech which in after life he was to use mainly. Though this text-book belongs to the close of the thir- teenth century, other incidental references suggest that the custom it implies was probably older. One of the chief reasons, for instance, of the unpopu- larity of Henry III. (i 214-1272) was the favor shown by him to noblemen who came from the Continent, and who would naturally have little knowledge of purely English customs and little sympathy with Eng- lish feelings. This was one of the grievances that added bitterness to the civil war between the king and the barons. In giving an account of the events of 1263, one of the writers of the Chronicle, miscalled Matthew of ^Yestminster's, states that whoever was unable to speak the English language was regarded by the common people as a vile and contemptible 1 It was the work of Walter e Normans ne cou|>e speke ho bote hor owe speche, And speke French as hii dude atom, and hor children dude also teche. So hat heiemen of his lond, hat of hor blod come, Holdeh alle hulke speche hat hii of horn nome. Vor bote a man conne Frenss, me telh of him lute ; Ac lovve men holdeh to Engliss and to hor owe speche 3ute. Ich wene her ne beh in al he world contreyes none pat ne holdeh to hor owe speche bote Engelond one. 1 From this it is evident that, about 1300, French was still the language of the higher classes, and that to be ignorant of it was in a measure a social stigma. Nor did this feeling speedily die out. In the earlier half of the fourteenth century flourished Ralph Hig- don, a monk of St. YVerburgh's in Chester. He 1 Lo! thus came England into the possession of Normandy. And the Normans could then speak only their own speech, And spoke French as they did at home, and caused their children also to be taught it. So that noblemen of this land, that come of their blood, Hold all the same speech that they from them received. For unless a man knows French, he is little thought of; Hut low men keep t" English, and to their own speech yet. 1 think then? he not m all th<- world any countries that do not hold to their own speech, but England alone. French and English in England. 61 wrote in Latin a history of the world, under the title of " Polychronicon " ; and in it he gave an account of the languages spoken in England, and of the corrup- tion that had crept into the native speech. A transla- tion of this work was made in the same century by John of Trevisa, vicar of Berkeley. The passage explanatory of the corruption that had overtaken the tongue he rendered in the following words : — pis apeyryng of the burb-tonge ys bycause of twey binges : — on ys, for chyldern in scole, a3enes the vsage and manere of al ober nacions, bub compelled for to leue here oune longage, and for to construe here lessons and here thinges a Freynsch, and habbeb, subthe the Normans come furst into Engelond. Also gentil men children bub )'tau3t for to speke Freynsch fram tyme bat a bub yrokked in here cradel, and conneb speke, and playe wib a child hys brouch; and oplondysch men vvol lykne ham-sylf to gentil men, and fondeb with gret bysynes for to speke Freynsch, for to be more ytold of. 1 The words of Higden, as translated by Trevisa, bear out the inference previously drawn that the children of the higher classes first learned to speak English, but from their earliest years were sedulously con- i This impairment of the birth-tongue is because of two things: one is, because children in school, against the usage and manner of all other nations, are compelled to leave their own language, and to construe their lessons and their matters in French, and have, since the Normans came first into England. Also, gentlemen's children are taught to speak French from (the) time that they are rocked in their cradle, and can speak, and play with a child's brooch ; and country men (or rustics) wish to make themselves like gentlemen, and strive with great earnestness to speak French, in order to be thought the more of. 62 liuglish Language. strained to abandon its employment among them- selves, and to use French in its place. This was, however, a practice that under the conditions then existing could not long continue. There is evidence that it had largely ceased before the middle of the fourteenth century. The author of the metrical ro- mance of "Arthur and Merlin," which is believed to have been written during the minority of Edward III., speaks of the advantages derived from the study of Latin and French in the schools ; but he adds the fol- lowing '.-i Right is that Inglishe Inglishe understand, That was born in Inglond; Freynshe use this gentilman, Ac everich Inglishe can; Many noble I have yseighe, That no Freynshe couthe seye. 1 Here is a direct statement that French was unknown to many, while English was known to all ; and this was without doubt increasingly the case as we advance farther into the fourteenth century. In truth, by the middle of that century the move- ment towards the general adoption of the native speech had acquired a momentum which could no longer be resisted. From this period, signs of the general em- 1 It is right tli hmen understand English, Who w ere 1>< »t n in England ; French, But evei y one knows English ; M.mv .i ii' il ileman 1 have Who could speak no French. French and English in England. 63 ployment of English by all classes in the community begin to multiply. Traditions connected with educa- tion are among the last to lose their hold upon the mind : practices connected with it are among the last to be abandoned. But, in the latter half of the four- teenth century, instruction through the medium of the French had to a great extent been supplanted by instruction through the medium of the English. On this point we have positive testimony. Higden's account of the state of the language belongs tc the earlier half of the fourteenth century. Trevisa's ver- sion of the " Polychronicon " was completed in 1387. In it he felt obliged to make a correction of the state- ment found in his original, which has just been given. This was rendered necessary by the changes that had taken place between the time the book was written and the time it was translated. Trevisa asserted, that, since the great pestilence of 1349, called the Black Death, the system of instruc- tion had been revolutionized. Upon the remark of Higden that the children of the higher classes were taught French from their cradles, he made the follow- ing comment : — pys manere was moche yvsed tofore the furste moreyn, and ys sebthe somdel ychaunged. For Iohan Cornwal, a mayster <>t gramere, chayngede the lore in gramer-scole, and construction oi Freynsch into Englysch : and Richard Pencrych lurnede bat manere techyng of hym, and ober men of Pencrych ; so )>at now, the 3er of oure Lord a thousond |>re hondred foure score and fyue, of he secunde Kyng Richard after be conquest nyne, in al the gramer-scoles of Engelond children leue)> Frensch 64 £&*£ Z<; ; . v \ construe^ And lurnep an Engtysch, and habbeh berhy avaun- jje yn anoler : here avauntage - at a lurneh here gramei yn lasse tyme than childem wet savauntag - it now childern of gramer-scole conneb no more Fr<. 3 in here lift heele. and bat ys harm for ham. an is passe the s ::\ men) - - - _ .til men habbeb now moche yleft for to teche here childern Frensch. 1 There is even more convincing evidence as to the gen; [option of English by all classes than the _ in the method of instruction in the schools. This can be found in the act in regard to the plead- ings in the law-courts, which was passed by the Parlia- ment held at Westminster in 136::, the thirty-sixth year of Edward III. The preamble recites in full reasons which led to the making of the statute ; and. in spite of the verbiage usual in documents of this kind, most oi it is well worthy of quotation. " Be- se it is often shewed to the king." it said. " by the 1 This custom was much used before the first pestilence, and is E d. For a teacher of gram- mar, changed the method oi instruction in the grammar-school, and (the) coi - from French into English; and Richard Pencrich >m him that manner of teaching, and other men from Pen- crich : so that now, the year of our Lord a thousand three hundred four - I five, the ninth (year of the reign) of the second king Rich ujuest, in all the grammar-schools of England children give up French, and construe and learn in English, and have thereby advantage on one side, and disadvantage on another. Their advanl irn their grammar in less time than children were wont to il lis [vantage is. that now grammar- school children know no more French than their left heel kr. and that is .em, if tl .md travel in I in many (other SO, gentlemen • now much left teaching their children French. French and English in England. 65 prelates, dukes, earls, barons, and all the commonalty, of the great mischiefs which have happened to divers of the realm, because the laws, customs, and statutes of this realm be not commonly known in the same realm, for that they be pleaded, shewed, and judged in the French tongue, which is much unknown in the said realm : so that the people who do implead or be impleaded in the king's court, and in the courts of others, have no knowledge nor understanding of that which is said for them or against them by their Ser- jeants and other pleaders ; and that reasonably the said laws and customs shall be the sooner learned and known and better understood in the tongue used in the said realm, and by so much every man of the said realm may the better govern himself without offending of the law, and the better keep, save, and defend his heritage and possessions ; and in divers regions and countries, where the king, the nobles, and others of the said realm have been, good governance and full right is done to every person, because that their laws and customs be learned and used in the tongue of the country : the king, desiring the good governance and tranquillity of his people, and to put out and eschew the harms and mischiefs, which do or may happen in this behalf by the occasions aforesaid, hath ordained and established by the assent aforesaid, that all pleas which shall be pleaded in his courts whatsoever, before any of his justices whatsoever, or in his other places, or before any of his other ministers whatsoever, or in the courts and places of any other lords whatsoever 66 English Language. within the realm, shall be pleaded, shewed, de- fended, answered, debated, and judged in the English tongue." The law then enacted went into operation at the beginning of the following year. It is a natural infer- ence, from the half-measures attending this piece of legislation, that the English element had become pre- dominant, not only in the national speech, but in the national character. The preamble declared that the statutes, in order to be known and better understood, should be in the tongue used in the realm. But the act itself went no further than to declare that the proceedings in courts of justice must be in the native speech. The law was published in French, the very language it set out to proscribe : and, while it ordered that the pleadings should be in English, it went on to direct that they should be enrolled in Latin. There can be little doubt that the changes which were taking place were looked upon by many with much disfavor. The growing ignorance of a tongue which was coming to be more and more widely used throughout Christendom was regarded almost in the light of a calamity. Trevisa's remark, that the chil- dren in the grammar-schools knew "no more French than their left heel," was re-echoed in the alliterative poem of " Piers Plowman," by Langland, who, in the- ory at least, is supposed to represent the sentiments of the common people. In a passage inveighing against the general ignorance prevalent in his day, he says : — Rise of Modern EnglisJi Literature. by Gramer, the grounde of al, bigyleth now children; For is none of this newe clerkes, whoso nymeth hede, That can versifye faire, ne formalich enditen; Ne nou3t on amonge an hundreth, that an auctour can con- strue, Ne rede a lettre in any langage but in Latyn or in Englissh. 1 Rise of Modern English Literature. — It was the Norman Conquest that had primarily brought about the degradation of the native speech. It was to the loss of the English possessions in France that the steady rise in the estimation and general use of the English language was mainly due. This movement which political changes had begun, two other causes now came in to accelerate. The first of these was the creation of a native literature of a character which contributed of itself to give respect and dignity to the tongue in which it was written. The second was the variation, steadily widening, which showed itself be- tween the French spoken in the island and the French spoken on the Continent ; and this, from the nature of things, could not but react upon the estimation in which the former was held. It was in the fourteenth century that the forces which give stability and credit to a language began first to operate powerfully upon the speech employed 1 Grammar, the ground of all (studies), now leads astray children; For there is no one of these new clerks, whoso taketh heed, That can versify fairly, or compose in a correct manner, And not one amongst an hundred that can construe an author, Nor read a letter in any language but in Latin or in English. — Pass/is XV., B. text, lines 365-369. 68 English Language. by the great body of the people. It was in the lat- ter half of that century that English literature, in the strict sense of the word literature, properly begins. Numerous works had, indeed, been written between the Conquest and this period ; but, with the excep- tion of some few specimens of lyric poetry, there had been nothing produced, which, looked at from a purely literary point of view, had any reason to show for its existence. If known to the cultivated classes at all, it was probably treated with contempt ; for it was certainly contemptible in execution, whatever it may have been in design. The men who, during those centuries, wrote in English, seem to have done so in most cases because they had not the knowledge or the ability to write in Latin or in French. To a very large extent, their works were translations. Com- positions on dull subjects, and which themselves im- parted additional dulness to the subjects of which they treated, could not, and as an actual fact did not, have any influence worth speaking of on the development of the native speech. They are frequently of great value to us when looked at from certain points of view : they are records of new words and phrases that had come in, of grammatical changes that had taken place, of linguistic influences of every kind that had been and still were at work ; but upon the speech of the people of that time they exercised no percepti- ble influence. Both in language and in literature men imitate only what they admire ; and the works pro- duced in English for nearly three centuries following Rise of Modem English Literature. 69 the Conquest could not, in the vast majority of in- stances, be admired. But in the latter half of the fourteenth century a number of eminent writers in the native speech arose. Modern investigation has indeed deprived our litera- ture of one of the most noted of these early authors, with whom it has previously been credited. This was Sir John Mandeville, who was at one time frequently styled " the father of English prose." In the prologue to the account of travels that goes under his name, he is represented as saying that he first wrote the work in Latin, turned it from that tongue into French, and then from French into English. It is now established that the book is largely a compilation made up from the writings of previous travellers. It is fairly certain that it was originally written in French, and translated into English about the end of the fourteenth century. It is an open question, indeed, if the assumed author, Sir John Mandeville, had any existence at all. Other writers there were, however, at this period, who gave distinction to the language. About 1362, Langland executed the first version of his famous alliterative poem, " The Vision of Piers Plowman." Two later versions appeared, one about 1377, and the other about 1393. All three had a wide circulation. During the last quarter of the century, Gower, after composing -works in Latin and in French, tried writing in English also, at the request, as he tells us, of King Richard II. He produced in this last-named tongue a poem of about thirty-two thousand lines, entitled jo English Language. " Confessio Amantis." But the two great authors of this time are Wycliffe and Chaucer ; and their influ- ence upon the language cannot well be over-esti- mated. The translation of the Scriptures, completed about 1380 by the former and his disciples, and revised about 1390 by Purvey, was circulated far and wide. Its effect upon the development of the English speech has been permanent. To it we owe that peculiar religious dialect, alike remarkable for simplicity, for beauty, and for force, which we see preserved still in our authorized version of the Bible, and which renders the prose of that work distinct from every other exist- ing form of English prose. Wycliffe brought out several other treatises in the native speech, all of them in prose. Yet though these are effectively written, it is only through this transla- tion of the Bible that he can be said to have exerted a lasting influence upon our tongue. What he did for the language of religion, Chaucer did for the lan- guage of literature. In his works, especially in the "Canterbury Tales," men for the first time had great models in the native speech ; and the dialect in which he wrote became the one universally employed in lit- erature, largely in consequence of his writing in it. His genius it was that gave dignity to the speech in which it found manifestation. His influence was the more powerful because his choice of the native tongue was not due to his ignorance of French or of Latin, nor to a desire to reach the lowest class of the people as well as the highest, but was a course deliberately Rise of Modern Englisli Literature. yi adopted under the conviction that the English lan- guage was the only one in which Englishmen had any business to write. It is clear, indeed, that, not only then but even much later there was great doubt as to the future of the native speech. Govver, as has just been seen, en- trusted to three languages a reputation which even with their aid has been hardly able to maintain itself in one. The authority of Chaucer's name and exam- ple was, therefore, not unnecessary in this matter. He died in 1400; and, for more than a century after his death, and especially after the revival of classical learning, it was still a venturesome undertaking for an Englishman to write in English if he could write in Latin. A hundred and fifty years later, Roger Ascham, one of the greatest scholars of his age, wrote a book on archery, entitled "Toxophilus." It was first published in 1545. In his dedication of the work to the gentlemen and yeomen of his native land, he felt it necessary to apologize for having written it in the native speech. " If any man would blame me," said he, " either for taking such a matter in hand, or else for writing it in the English tongue, this answer I may make him : that, what the best of the realm think it honest for them to use, I, one of the meanest sort, ought not to suppose it vile for me to write. And though to have written it in another tongue had been both more profitable for my study, and also more honest for my name, yet I can think my labor well bestowed, if, with a little hinderance of my profit and 7 2 English Language. my name, may come any furtherance to the pleasure or commodity of the gentlemen and yeomen of England, for whose sake I took this matter in hand." And again, in his dedication of the same work to the king, Henry VIII., he says that it would have been easier, and fitter for his profession, to have written the book in Latin or in Greek. The case of Ascham is by no means an extreme one, though he makes conspicuous the comparative disre- pute into which English had fallen, in consequence of the enthusiastic devotion which in his time was begin- ning to be paid to the great classic writers of Greece and Rome. This feeling about the native tongue showed itself as strongly in the seventeenth century. In 1623, seven years after the death of Shakspeare, Bacon spent no small part of his time in turning his books, originally written in English, into Latin. He did this with the avowed object of saving them for posterity. In the dedication of the third edition of his Essays to the Duke of Buckingham, written in 1625, he says, " I do conceive that the Latin volume of them (being in the universal language) may last as long as books last." The immense incapacity of an author of the seventeenth century, and that author Bacon, to comprehend the future of his native tongue, is, perhaps, the highest tribute that can be paid to that great author of the fourteenth century who delib- erately trusted his reputation entirely to it. Debasement of Anglo-Norman French. — The sec- ond cause for the preference of English to French, Debasement of Anglo-Norman French. 73 which showed itself more and more during the four- teenth century, was largely a result of the loss of Nor- mandy. At the time of the Conquest, and for a long period following, there was no one tongue in North- ern France recognized by all as the classic French language. There were, instead, four great dialects of it, corresponding to four great political divisions. These were the Norman, the Picard, the Burgundian, and the French of the Isle of France, which last is strictly the only one that then bore the name of French. Each of these had a literature of its own, and the distinction of speech between all of them was marked enough to impress itself upon the men of that time and is plainly recognized now in the literary monuments that have been handed down. Of these four dialects, it was the Norman that in the eleventh century was carried over into England. In France, as in England, it was political considera- tions that decided the character of the speech that was to become generally adopted. In 987, Hugh Capet, Duke of France, was elected its king. At first, his sovereignty, outside of his immediate possessions, was little more than nominal. The great provinces were practically independent, and the languages spoken in them were on an equality. But, during the centuries following, the power of the French royal house steadily rose, and that of its feudal dependents as steadily sank. Under its immediate control, especially in the thirteenth century, fell many territories over which it had previously exercised merely a superior lordship. 74 English Language. The dialect it employed was the dialect of its ances- tral dominions, the Isle of France, in which Paris is situated. As it extended its authority over the neigh- boring districts, it extended along with it the use of its own form of speech. The French of Paris spread gradually over the conquered provinces. It came to be considered the exclusive language of culture and of literature, the language which every one spoke who looked upon himself as belonging to the higher classes. This had the inevitable effect of confining the previ- ously independent tongues of the great provinces to the use of the peasantry. These tongues, therefore, became dialects, which the literary language no longer recognized as possessing any authority ; or they even sank to that lower form of dialect, peculiar to certain districts or certain classes, which we call patois. This was what took place in Normandy after its loss by the English crown in the early part of the thirteenth century. But, bad as the speech of Normandy might come to appear as compared with that of Paris, it would naturally seem far worse with that dialect after it had been transported to England, and cut off from direct communication with the same dialect on the Continent. Divergences would naturally arise. The Norman- French of the island would and did intro- duce words and forms that belonged to the varying dialects of the various provinces of the Continent that from time to time fell under the sway of the kings of England. It would be and it was affected by the pronunciation of the English of the native inhabitants. Debasement of Anglo-Norman French. 75 Later it was subjected to the overshadowing influence of the French of Paris. It accordingly came to have a special development of its own. Anglo-French, in consequence, was in many particu- lars unlike the provincial speech of Normandy or of any of the other dialects used on the Continent. Dur- ing the course of the centuries, it was certain to deviate further and further from the French which had come to the front as the classic form of the language. It could not fail, therefore, to share in the depreciation which is always sure to overtake variations from what has become the standard form of the speech. Such would necessarily be its fate in France. Such was also its fate in England. References exist to the low estimate in which it was held in the fourteenth century in both countries. In the " Canterbury Tales," Chaucer introduces as one of the characters a Prioress, who is represented as paying special attention to form and ceremony. As a fashionable woman, she felt it incumbent to speak French, but was unable to speak what had then come to be regarded as pure French. He says : — And Frenssh she spak ful faire and fetysly, After the scole of Stratford-atte-Bowe, For Frenssh of Parys was to hire unknowe. On the other hand, in the prologue to "The Testament of Love," written by a contemporary of Chaucer, and long imputed to him, there occurs a sentence which marks plainly the contemptuous opinion entertained j6 English Language. by the French of the debased Anglo-Norman dialect found in England. " In Latin and French," said the author, " hath many sovereign wits had great delight to endite, and have many noble things fulfilled ; but certes there be some that speak their poesy matter in French, of which speech the Frenchmen have as good a fantasy as we have in hearing of Frenchmen's Eng- lish." General Adoption of English by all Classes. — All these agencies co-operated in bringing about the adoption of the native speech by all classes ; yet at the end of the fourteenth century, while the success of English was well assured, its victory was even then far from complete. As was not unnatural, French, after it ceased to be necessary, came to be fashion- able ; and its use long survived its usefulness. In fact, it had been for centuries the language not only of law and of judicial proceedings, but also of offu ial communications of all sorts. This continued to be the case after it had gone entirely out of use as the speech df any portion of the people. Nearly all the letters of Henry IV., who ruled from 1399 to 1413, are written in it or in Latin. Indeed, in the early part of the reign of that monarch it almost seems as if it were not considered respectful to address him in English. Letters to him are even found written in two languages. The writer begins in French, as if that were the correct thing to do, but, under the inability to express himself with sufficient clearness or urgency, passes over to the more familiar English. Disuse of French in England. JJ There is even a more significant illustration of this feeling in a letter of the Scottish Earl of March, dated Feb. i8 s 1400, in which he offered his services to the English king and entreated his support. At the close it contained an apology for being written in the Eng- lish language. " And, noble prince," says the earl, " mervaile yhe nocht that I write my lettres in Ejig- lishe, fore that ys mare clere to myne understandyng than Latyne or Fraunche." But, during the whole reign of Henry IV. and his successor Henry V. (1 413-1422), the marks of grow- ing unfamiliarity with French rapidly accumulate. One of the most striking instances of this is to be found, indeed, in the very earliest part of the fifteenth cen- tury, in the case of the negotiations that took place in 1404, between France and England, in regard to the outrages committed by each nation at sea. There were three ambassadors on the part of the latter power, one of whom was a professor of both the civil and the canon law. In a letter to the French Council, dated Sept. 1, 1404, they beg that the answer may be returned to them in Latin, and not in French. Again, in a letter of the 3d of October to the Duchess of Burgundy, they state, that although the treaties be- tween England and France had been wont to be drawn up in French by the consent of the temporal princes concerned in them, who did not understand Latin as well as French, yet all the letters missive that had passed between the contracting parties had been written in the former tongue, as being the common 78 English Language. and vulgar idiom ; and this custom they desire to have continued. Later on the reasons for these two requests are distinctly given. On the 21st of October, in acknowledging the reception of a communication from the French ambassadors, they complain of its being written in French, and state, that, for men unlearned as they are, it might as well have been put into Hebrew. It is a most striking proof of the gen- eral ignorance of French that had come to prevail in England, that ambassadors selected to carry on deli- cate and difficult negotiations, one of whom was a scholar by profession, should have been utterly unac- quainted with the language of the people with which terms of settlement were to be made, — a language, moreover, which was still mainly used in official docu- ments in their own country. But during the whole of the fifteenth century this ignorance kept on steadily increasing among all classes. A necessary result was to substitute the native for the foreign speech in all the transactions of life, including, what is always the last to be altered, prescribed forms. It was sometimes the case that the higher orders changed their methods far sooner than those inferior to them in position. It was in the first half of this century that many of the London guilds began to have their regulations translated from French into English, and to use the latter tongue in keeping their bonks. A curious entry in the records of the Com- pany of lirewers asserts directly that the greater part of the Lords and Commons had begun to have the Disuse of French in England. 79 proceedings in which they were concerned written down in the native language. Furthermore, it seems to say that direct influence was exercised by King Henry V. to substitute the use of English for French. Of the entry, which is in Latin, the following is a translation : " Whereas, Our mother-tongue, to wit, the English tongue, hath in modern days begun to be honorably enlarged and adorned : for that our most excellent lord, King Henry the Fifth, hath, in his letters missive, and divers affairs touching his own person, more willingly chosen to declare the secrets of his will ; and, for the better understanding of his people, hath, with a diligent mind, procured the com- mon idiom (setting aside others) to be commended by the exercise of writing ; and there are many of our craft of brewers who have the knowledge of writing and reading in the said English idiom ; but in others, to wit, the Latin and French, before these times used, they do not in any wise understand ; for which causes, with many others, it being considered how that the greater part of the Lords and trusty Commons have besmn to make their matters to be noted down in our O mother-tongue, we also in our craft, following in some manner their steps, have decreed in future so to com- mit to memory the needful things which concern us." At last, towards the close of the fifteenth century, the laws enacted by Parliament were put into English. After the Conquest, they had usually been published in Latin ; but in the reign of the first Edward (1272-1307), at the very period the French was 8o English Language. beginning to lose its hold upon the nation, it was introduced into the statutes. In these it gradually supplanted the Latin, and by the end of the four- teenth century the latter tongue was no longer used in legislative enactments. At the end of the fifteenth century, French, in turn, had given way to English. During the reign of Richard III. (1483-1485), the laws appear — at least in some instances — to have been written in both tongues. Early, however, in the reign of his successor, Henry VII., English began to be exclusively used. With this accomplished, the triumph of the popular speech may be called complete. Scattered instances, it is true, of the employment of French can be found at a much later period. In- struction in the schools through the medium of that tongue had been generally given up, as we have seen, before the end of the fourteenth century. Yet it un- doubtedly continued to survive for a long time in par- ticular places. Even as late as the reign of Henry VIII. (1509-1547), at the time of the dissolution of the monasteries, it was still found taught in one of the conventual schools. A letter to Cromwell from John Ap Rice, one of the visitors of religious houses, relat- ing to the monastery of Laycock in Wiltshire, men- tions a form of French as still being used there which was certainly then used by no people to whom that tongue was a native speech. "The house," he says, "is very clean, well-repaired, and well-ordered: and one thing I observed worthy the advertisement (i.e. Disuse of French in ling' and. 81 notice) there. The Ladies have their Rule, the Insti- tutes of their Religion, and the ceremonies of the same written in the French tongue, which they under- stand well, and are very perfitt in the same. Albeit that it varieth from the vulgar French that is now used, and is much like the French that the Common Law is written in." It is likely indeed, that the efforts first to obtain and then to retain the English sovereignty of France, which went on in the earlier half of the fifteenth cen- tury, had a tendency to retard to some extent the general abandonment of the French speech. This at least was apparently the case with men belonging to the legal profession. These seem to have clung with special tenacity to that tongue. As late as 1549, Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, arguing with those who insisted that the mass should be celebrated in Latin, declared that he had " heard suitors murmur at the bar because their attorneys had pleaded their cases in the French tongue which they understood not." Still, instances of the kind just mentioned are nothing but accidental survivals. They are no evidence of the wide prevalence of that tongue in England at that time — no more so, in fact, than it would now be evidence of its prevalence in this country or in Great Britain, that the word oyes (Anglo-French, oyez 'hear ye') is still used in courts of law to proclaim silence, or that the words La Reine (or Le Roi) le veut, 'The Queen wills it,' are still the ones employed to signify the royal assent to an act of parliament. CHAPTER V. PERIODS IN THE HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE, AND THE CHANGES WROUGHT IN IT BY THE NORMAN CONQUEST. What was this popular speech, which, at the end of the fourteenth century, was for the first time mani- festing its capability of becoming the vehicle of a great literature? It was certainly not the Anglo- Saxon. Between that and it had taken place a diver- gence even more profound and wide-reaching than that which marks the separation of French from its parent Latin. The tongue spoken or written by an Englishman of the tenth century would have been as unintelligible to an Englishman of the fourteenth as it is to an Englishman of the nineteenth. In the course of those four hundred years the language had not simply suffered modification, or undergone de- velopment, it had experienced revolution. Nor was this popular tongue precisely that which is found in the literature of to-day; though the differences be- tween it and our present speech are differences of degree, and not of kind; or, to make use of the same form of statement already employed, they are differ- 82 English after the Conquest. 83 ences that have arisen from modification and develop- ment, and not at all from revolution. To bring out the general nature of the divergence in grammar and vocabulary that came into being between the English of the tenth and eleventh centuries and that of the fourteenth will be the aim of the present chapter. The Language before the Conquest. — Let us at this point recount briefly the results already reached. Up to the Norman Conquest the linguistic situation may be thus described: A Low-Germanic tongue was the speech of all the Teutonic inhabitants of Great Britain from the Channel to the Frith of Forth. It was called by those who then spoke it, Eng/isc, that is, 'English,' but is now styled by some Anglo-Saxon, by others Old English. In this tongue there existed several dialects. One of these, the West-Saxon, had become the language of law and of literature, — the language in which the educated classes talked and wrote. Into this language there had been introduced in the course of centuries a very slight number of Celtic and of Norse words, and a much larger num- ber of Latin ones. But, notwithstanding these addi- tions, it continued to be — what it had been, not merely as regards grammar, but also as regards vocab- ulary — essentially a Teutonic tongue. The Language after the Conquest. — With the in- troduction of Norman-French, this state of affairs underwent a change. It was not that the Anglo- Saxon ceased to be a spoken language, or even a written one; but it did cease to be a cultivated one. 84 English Language. One result of this was, that the West-Saxon dialect sank speedily from its position of supremacy, and in process of time fell to the level of the other dialects which it had itself supplanted. The inevitable effect was, that the popular speech was left to run its own course, without any restraining influence whatever. Each district had words and forms and syntactical constructions and methods of pronunciation of its own, which were little known or used outside of its borders. Everything was in confusion. Such a result as this is something that is always sure to occur when a cultivated tongue comes to be used exclusively by the uneducated or the partially edu- cated. No standard of authority exists anywhere in it, which is felt to be binding upon all. The influence of the old literature has passed away; for it is em- bodied in a form of speech which has gone or is rapidly going out of use. As yet no great authors have risen to establish methods of expression to which the speech of the better class will be made to conform. There are few, if any, books written in this new developing tongue. There are but few per- sons to read those that are written. Learned almost wholly by the ear, and scarcely at all by the eye, the language is specially subject to the phonetic and linguistic changes of all kinds that rude and ignorant men may bring about by modifying pronunciation, by confounding declensions and conjugations, by dis- regarding syntactical laws, in short, by all the numer- ous processes of decay and regeneration to which a English after the Conquest. 85 living tongue is subject by the very fact of its being a living tongue. To such influences as these the native speech was exposed, with little check, after the Conquest; and it at once entered, in conse- quence, upon a series of rapid and violent changes. These changes were of several kinds; but there were two principal ones. One of them was the loss of inflections in the native speech; the other, the introduction into it of French words. The latter is a direct result of the Conquest; the former, only an indirect one. This is clear from the fact that even before the Conquest the process of stripping the speech of its inflection had already begun to show itself. Furthermore, it has taken place on a large scale in the case of other Teutonic peoples, whose languages have been subject to none of the influences that follow subjugation by a foreign race speaking a foreign tongue. What, therefore, the introduction of Norman-French into England did was to hasten rapidly that abandonment of inflection by the Eng- lish speech, which, in a greater or less degree, was certain to come some time. But besides this, it had a powerful influence upon the extent to which this abandonment took place. The inhabitants of the island were largely cut off by their position from con- tact with foreign nations. At the time of the French invasion they had developed a literature of their own. These two conditions would have concurred to pre- vent the loss of inflections on any extensive scale, had not the abolition of any standard of authority, result- 86 English Language. ing from the Conquest, thrown the native speech into a, chaotic state and interfered throughout with its orderly development. The changes that took place, as a result of the Conquest, indirectly in the inflectional system, and directly in the vocabulary, of the English tongue, were so numerous and great that it has been cus- tomary to give the language during several centuries different names. It is of itself a convincing proof of the confused and varying character of our early speech, that scarcely any two scholars have agreed upon the titles or dates of the periods which they have adopted. This is not at all to be wondered at. Scientific precision in such respects is not attainable in even the most cultivated and stable tongues. Dates in the history of a language are convenient for reference ; they are worth little for accuracy of statement. Men do not use one form of speech one year, and a different form the following year. This, which is true of any tongue, no matter how marked the changes, is especially true of the earlier stages of our own, in which the changes were not merely rapid, but in which they were unequal in different parts of the country. The language of the North of England advanced much more quickly toward Modern English than the language of the South; and a state- ment, in consequence, which would be true of the one, might be grossly false of the other. Periods of the English Language. — It is, accord- ingly, to be borne in mind that the titles and dates Periods of English. 87 about to be given are in themselves of no authority, and are used mainly as a matter of convenience; that the same terms, when employed by others, may not and often do not mean the same things; that other divisions, and an entirely different nomenclature, will be found in other works treating upon this same subject. In particular, there is a division and a nomenclature now frequently used, with which it may be important for the student to be familiar. Accord- ing to this, the language down to 1100 — sometimes to 1 1 50 — -is termed Old English; from that date to about 1500, Middle English, and from 1500 to the present day, Modern English. With this understand- ing, it is only necessary to add that the following will be the names and limits of the periods into which, in this volume, English is divided : — I. The Anglo-Saxon period will embrace that form of the language spoken from the first coming of the Saxons and Angles — that is, from the middle of the fifth century — to the middle of the century following the Norman conquest, — that is, to the year 1150. II. The Old English period will embrace the form of the language spoken between 1150 and 1350. III. Middle English will embrace the form of the language used between 1350 and 1550. IV. Modern English will be the name given to the language as spoken from the middle of the sixteenth century to the present time. The following schedule represents, accordingly, the 88 English Language. nomenclature of the periods, with their limits, as employed in this volume : — I. Anglo-Saxon 450-1 150 II. Old English 1 150-1350 III. Middle English I 3S°-i5SO IV. Modern English 1 550— Furthermore, when it is desired to use a general term covering the period between 1150 and 1550, the term " Early English " will be employed. This corresponds essentially with the period designated as the Middle English by those who apply to Anglo- Saxon the term Old English. Literature of the Old English Period. — Of the literature of the Anglo-Saxon period, a slight account has already been given. In the Old English period there were composed a large number of works, many of which still exist only in manuscript. To a great extent they are translations from the French, or a working-over of French productions. As regards their subject-matter, they may be divided into the following classes : — 1. Religious works. Of these, one of the earliest and on the whole the most important is the "Ormu- lum," a poem without rhyme or alliteration, written about 1200, by an Augustinian monk named Ormin or Orm. It is essentially a life of Christ made up from the Gospels. It is marked by one peculiarity, which has made it of special importance in the his- tory of English pronunciation. It intentionally car- Literature of the Old Engl is Ji Period. 89 ries out one principle which has to some extent governed the spelling of our speech. This is the doubling of the consonant after a short vowel. Thus, for illustration, and, under, taken, birth, appear in this poem as annd, unnderr, takenn, and birrth, while word, book, write, and right are spelled as at present. There were also a number of works of a moral and religious character, both in prose and verse; homilies and homiletic treatises, some of which are of an earlier date than the "Ormulum"; legends of saints and martyrs; and versions of his- tories or parts of histories contained in the Bible, intermixed with narratives drawn from other sources. 2. Romances and legendary history. These may be said to begin with the "Brut," a poem composed about the same time as the " Ormulum" by a Worces- tershire priest named Layamon. It is a chronicle, embodying that fabulous history of Britain, which for several centuries was accepted as true. The poem takes its name from a mythical Brutus, a great-grand- son of y^neas, who collected the descendants of the Trojans that had been taken captive by the Greeks, freed them from their slavery, and after various adventures conducted them to Britain, which received from him its name. It then gives an account of the lives and actions of the legendary kings who suc- ceeded, down to the occupation of the country by the Saxons. In this list of monarchs the names of Lear and Cymbeline have been made especially familiar tn students of literature by the plays of Shakspeare. 90 English Language. The work of Layamon has been handed down in two versions, the first of which is dated about 1200, while the second is thought to be about fifty years later. Besides the "Brut," there is a long list of romantic narratives dealing with the fortunes of purely fictitious characters, such as Havelock, King Horn, Sir Bevis of Hampton, and the Knights of Arthur's Round Table, or with events largely ficti- tious in the lives of real personages, such as Alexander the Great, Charlemagne, and Richard I. of England. 3. Histories. These were in part fabulous, it is true, but not so deemed by their authors. They belong exclusively to the latter half of the Old Eng- lish period, and consist of chronicles in verse by a writer commonly termed Robert of Gloucester, and by Robert Manning of Brunne. The work of the latter is a translation from the French of Pierre de Langtoft. Both of these writers treat of the history of Britain from the legendary coming of Brutus to a period near their own time; the former ending with the accession of Edward I. in 1272; the latter, with his death in 1307. 4. Shorter poems, either of a satirical or of a purely lyrical character. The latter are much the more abundant. The most conspicuous among these are "The Land of Cokaygne," the "Ule and Nihtegale " (the Owl and Nightingale), and a series of lyric poems of a political, devotional, or social nature. The works in all these classes are of the highest value to the student of the language; but it is only those of Alliterative Verse and Rhyme. 91 this last class that have any claim whatever to literary excellence, and these are comparatively few in number. Alliterative Verse. — One feature worthy of men- tion, that characterizes the Old English period, is the tendency to abandon alliteration, and substitute for it final rhyme. In Anglo-Saxon verse instances of rhyme are occasional, and probably often purely accidental; at any rate, it is only in a piece of eighty lines that it is deliberately employed through- out, and in that it is mixed with alliteration, with the result that no modern scholar has been successful in getting any coherent meaning out of the poem, or rather of putting any into it. It was not until after the Norman Conquest that rhyme came to be regu- larly employed. Even then it was apt to be more or less combined with alliteration, especially in the early part of the Old English period. Though it soon began to be discarded, the pure alliterative verse did not die out entirely till the sixteenth century. It main- tained its ground in the North long after it had been disused in the South. Chaucer, in the "Canterbury Tales," comments on these distinguishing peculiarities of the two parts of the island, when, in the following lines, he represents the parish priest as preferring to say what he has to say in prose, instead of adopting either of the two forms of verse then in use : — But trusteth wel, I am a Southern man. I can not geste x — rom, ram, ruf — by lettre, Ne, 2 God wot, rym holde I but litel bettre. 1 Compose a story. 2 Nor. 9 2 English Language. Yet in spite of the fact that alliterative verse was the favorite form of versification in the North, and did not die out till the sixteenth century, the most conspicuous work composed in it belongs to the fourteenth century, and to the dialect of the Mid- land. This is "The Vision of Piers Plowman." It exists in three versions, and the opening lines of the prologue in the first version will exemplify the char- acter it had come to assume, as contrasted with the alliterative verse of the Anglo-Saxon period 1 : — In a somer sesun whon softe was be sonne, I schop me into a schroud a scheep as I were ; In habite of an hermite vnholy of werkes, Wende I wydene in bis world wondres to here. Bote in a Mayes morwnynge on Malueme liulles Me bifel a ferly a feyrie, me bouhte; I was weori of wandringe • and wente me to reste, Vndur a brod banke • bi a bourne syde, And as I lay and leonede and lokede on the watres, I slumberde in a slepyng hit sownede so murie. 2 1 See page 30. 2 In a summer season when mild [soft] was the sun, I put [shaped] me into a garment [shroud] as if I were a shepherd ; In habit of a hermit unholy of acts [works], Went I wide about in this world -wonders to hear. I .nt on a May morning - on Malvern hills There befell me a wonder - of fairy origin, methought. I was weary of wandering - and wont to rest me, Under a broad bank - by the side of a stream [burn] , And as I lay and leaned and looked on the waters, I slumbered in a sleep - it sounded so merrily. In the version here given the modern forms of the words, for which others are substituted, arc added, enclosed in brackets. Grammatical Changes in Old English. 93 The inferiority of alliterative verse to rhyme as an instrument of expression, led to its abandonment by all the Teutonic nations at comparatively early peri- ods in their literary history. Changes in Grammar between Anglo-Saxon and Mid- dle English. — A more detailed account of the changes that took place in the grammatical structure after the Conquest will be found in the second part; here but a slight summary can be given. Comparisons can necessarily be made only between periods which have a standard literature of their own. Outside of these no general statements are trustworthy. The several dialects of English varied widely in the order and degree of their development, and therefore what is true of one at a particular time would be untrue of the rest. Grammatical forms which appear regu- larly in one author would not be found at all in another, writing at the very same time. Accordingly, comparison will in this particular case be made between the literary West-Saxon, and that dialect of English which was employed by the great writers of the fourteenth century. It was they who established the language of literature. Of them Chaucer, as the greatest of all, may be selected as the representative. Consequently it is his usage that will be taken as the standard by which the extent and character of the changes that had gone on are to be tested. One further fact is to be borne in mind. Whatever may be the limits fixed upon for the periods in the history of any tongue, and whatever characteristics 94 English Language. may be attributed to these periods, assertions made in regard to them can only be true generally; they are always subject to specific exceptions. To illus- trate this point, let us take its, the genitive of the neuter pronoun of the third person. It is not till the Modern English period that it came into existence. It took the place of his, which had been previously the neuter as well as masculine genitive. It would be right, therefore, to say that his, as the genitive of the neuter pronoun of the third person is not char- acteristic of Modern English. Yet, while this is true generally, it is so far from being true specifically, that his can be found where we should now use its, for a hundred years after the Modern English period begins. We meet with it in the works of Shakspeare and Milton, and it appears frequently in the authorized version of the Bible, as in verses like the following: " If the salt have lost his savor, wherewith shall it be salted?" Let us begin, then, with the modifications which the inflectional system underwent. These are first brought to our knowledge by certain orthographical changes which took place in consequence of a change in pronunciation. Two of them are of special impor- tance. One is the weakening into e of the vowels a, o, and u of the terminations. Thus, in Anglo-Saxon, -an is the regular ending of the infinitive: it was soon after the Conquest weakened into -en. 'To tell,' in the eleventh century was tellan: in the twelfth century it became telle n. So, in like manner, oxa, Grammatical Changes in Old English. 95 'ox, ' became oxe ; oxan, 'oxen, ' became oxen ; s tanas, 'stones, ' and s tolas, 'stools, ' became stanes and stoles ; caru, 'care,' became eare. This was a change that was certain to happen in English, as in the other Teutonic languages, had the Norman-French never set foot in Britain. All the effect produced by their coming was to hasten its general adoption; and during the twelfth century it did become generally established. The second change was the dropping of the final -;/, — a peculiarity which the Northumbrian dialect, as has been seen (p. 46), exhibited at an early day. This, however, was much slower of general adoption than the weakening of the vowels a, 0, and //. In truth, though common much earlier, it did not become thoroughly established till the latter part of the fifteenth century. This final -// can be found even in the sixteenth century or later, though it then sur- vived merely as an archaism. Its gradual disappear- ance from the endings, working in conjunction with the weakening of the vowels a, o, and u just men- tioned, had the effect of making the final -e the one termination of the Middle English which represented nearly all the terminations of the Anglo-Saxon that had been preserved at all. Accordingly, in the study of this one ending is involved the study of nearly the whole grammatical inflection of that period. It was, moreover, largely due to the steady reduction of all terminations to this single one, that the confu- sion sprang up in usage, which, in turn, led, in great 96 English Language. measure, to the rejection of inflection altogether. What there was left of it in the fourteenth century, compared with Anglo-Saxon, will be stated very briefly. There are exceptions to the universal appli- cability of the results to be here given, but they are neither numerous nor important. In the noun, the two leading declensions of the Anglo-Saxon — the vowel or strong, and the consonant or weak 1 — with their several subordinate declen- sions, had been reduced to the one inflection seen in the masculine noun of the vowel declension. Dis- tinction between the terminations of the nominative, dative, and accusative singular had practically dis- appeared. The only case which had a form of its own was the genitive, which ended in -es. This uni- fying process had gone on even more thoroughly in the plural. All the four cases had there been reduced to a common form, which is, as now, the same as that of the genitive singular. This -es of the genitive singular and of the plural usually formed a distinct syllable in pronunciation, at least in monosvllabic nouns. Thus kings would be pronounced as kinges. The adjective in Anglo-Saxon was very rich in inflections. By the latter part of the fourteenth century it had been nearly stripped of them. All that was left to represent the numerous termina- tions that once existed was the final -e, and this was not used extensively. Its main employment was to distinguish the plural from the singular. 1 Sec Part II., sees. 24, 25, and 27. Grammatical Changes in Old English. 97 Thus, while in the latter number we should have old man, in the former we should have aide men. Obviously even this distinction could not prevail in the case of adjectives, such as nene bygynnyng J>re maner speche, Souberon, NorJ>eron, and Myddel speche (in he myddel of J>e lond), as hy come of bre maner people of Germania; noseless, by commyxstion and mellyng, furst wib Danes and afterward wib Normans, in menye be contray longage ys apeyred, and some vseb strange wlaffyng, chyteryng, harryng and garryng, grisbittyng. [By these five words Trevisa translates the Latin boatus et garritus'] . . . Also, of be for- seyde Saxon tonge bat ys deled a bre, and ys abyde scars- lych with feaw vplondysch men, and ys gret wondur; for men of be est wib men of be west, as hyt were vndur be same party of heuene, acordeb more in sounyng of speche ban men uf the nor)) wib men of the soub; berfore hyt ys bat Mercij, I at bub men of Myddel Engelond, as hyt were parteners of be endes, vndurstondeb betre be syde longages, Norberon and Souberon, than Norberon and Souberon vndurstondeb eyber ober.' : l 1 " Also Englishmen, though they had from the beginning three kinds of speech, Southern, Northern, and Midland speech (in the middle of the land), as they came from three kinds of people of Germany, nevertheless, by mixing and mingling, first with Danes and afterward with Normans, in many the native language is cor- rupted, and some use strange babbling, chattering, growling and snarling, teeth-grinding . . . Also, in regard to the aforesaid Saxon tongue, that is divided into three, and has remained [in use] with [a] few country-men, there is great wonder; for men of the East with men of the West, as it were under the same portion of heaven, agree more in the sound of [their] speech than men of the North with men of the South; therefore it is that the Mercians, that are Early English Dialects. 1 1 9 The extant writings of this period bear ample witness to the truth of Higden's statement. There were, especially during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, and even earlier, three great divisions of English speech. The differences between these were so pronounced, that the dwelling-place of a man within certain limits could be immediately told by his lan- guage. The distinction is traceable now without diffi- culty in the works that have been handed down. It was as fully recognized then. Chaucer, for illustration, wrote in the Midland dialect of the eastern counties, and exemplified regularly in his writings all its peculiar grammatical characteristics. For instance, he forms the third person singular of the present tense of the verb in -///, the plural in -en or -e. Consequently he would say, for example, he loveth and they loven or they love. But in "The Reeve's Tale " he introduces two characters who are described as coming from a town " far in the North " ; and the special peculiarities of that dialect are designedly represented in the forms they use. In the language put into their mouths the third person singular of the present tense ends in -s, as generally in Modern English : the plural has like- wise the same termination. Other characteristics of the speech of the North occur such as the use of a for 0, as in ga, haui(c), hahl, nat, sang; of /// for to; and of sal for slial. Specifically, also, a variety of the men of Middle England, as it were partners of the ends, understand better the border languages, Northern and Southern, than Northern or Southern understands each one the other," 120 English Language. Northern dialect is exemplified, in which is is found in the first and second persons of the present tense of the substantive verb. The following lines show speci- mens of all these peculiarities : — Oure manciple, 1 I hope, 2 he will be deed, 3 Svva 4 werkes ay the wanges 5 in his heed; And forthy is I come, and eek Alayn, To grynde oure corn, and carie it ham agayn. Yit saugh I nevere, by my fader kyn, How that the hopur wagges til and fra. I is as ill a miller as are ye. I have herd seyd, ' Man sal taa ' of twa thynges, Slyk 8 as he fyndes, or taa 7 slyk 8 as he brynges.' No student of the earlier form of our language would think of attributing these lines to any other dialect than that of the North. Their introduction into a tale written in the Midland speech shows that the distinctive peculiarities of each were fully understood then. The divergence, indeed, was not only generally recognized, it was also so deeply marked, that it may almost* be said that works composed in either of the two extreme dialects required to be translated into the other in order to be understood. A well-known early English poem, the " Cursor Mundi," was written about the end of the thirteenth century in the language of the North. One story in it was taken, however, from L Purveyor. 2 Expect. 3 Be deed = die. 4 So. 5 Cheek-teeth. G Therefore, • Take. » Such. Early English Dialects. 1 2 1 a work composed in the dialect of the South ; and the author of the " Cursor Mundi " speaks of the latter speech in words which would almost lead one to think that he looked upon it as a foreign tongue ; for, after mentioning his authority, he goes on to say ; — " In a writt this ilke I fand, Himself it wroght I understand. In Suthrin Englijs was it draun, And I haue turned it till vr aun Langage of the northren lede, That can nan other Englis rede." l Lines 20059-64. Geographical Limits of the Three Dialects. — The geographical limits of these divisions of English speech may be roughly stated as follows: 1. The Northern dialect, as the lineal descendant of the Northumbrian dialect of Anglo-Saxon, covered about the same extent of territory ; that is, the region stretching from the Humber on the south to the Frith of Forth on the north, and bounded by the Pennine Mountains on the west. It consequently included the present counties of York, Durham, and Northumberland in England, and the Lowlands of Scotland, except in the south-west. During the four- 1 " In a writing this same [tiling] I found; He himself composed it, I understand. In Southern English was it composed, And I have turned it to our own Language of the northern people, That can read no other English." 122 English Language. teenth and fifteenth centuries, and later, it was, how- ever, making its way throughout the whole of Scot- land, and slowly supplanting the native Celtic tongue, though it never succeeded in doing this completely. Still, at a comparatively early period, it had advanced far to the north along the eastern coast. The only one of the various sub-dialects of the Northern dialect, that became a literary speech, was the Lowland Scotch. But after the union, in 1603, of Scotland and England under a common king, that itself sank to the position of a dialect of standard English. 2. The Midland dialect occupied the central coun- ties from the Humber to the Thames, and the district west of the Pennine range of hills. It was doubtless the descendant of the Mercian of the Anglo-Saxon period which covered substantially the same territory. From the outset it was divided into two distinct vari- eties, called respectively from the regions of country wherein they were spoken, the East Midland and the West Midland. Of these, the former stretched over a much larger district, and was altogether more impor- tant both for its linguistic influence and for the char- acter of the literature that was written in it. 3. The Southern stretched from the Thames to the English Channel. It also extended to portions of the western counties north of the Thames, particularly Gloucestershire, Herefordshire, and Worcestershire. It was a direct descendant of the West- Saxon, the classical language of our fathers, though it occasionally exhibits forms for which there is nothing correspond- Early Engl is Ji Dialects. 123 ing to be found in the monuments that have been pre- served of the earliest speech. Kentish may have been originally very different ; but as we find it in the Old English period, it is only a strongly marked variety of the Southern dialect. It is not to be understood, indeed, that there were not variations, and great variations, everywhere within these lines. As there was then no uniform standard English, so there was no uniform Northern, or Mid- land, or Southern dialect. Under each one of these was included a number of sub-dialects, with special peculiarities of their own, and often confined to com- paratively small districts. Thus the / is and the thou is, given above in Chaucer's representation of the Northern dialect, would be a grammatical form true of only a portion of the region covered by that partic- ular kind of English. It would be very far from being true of all of it, and probably of most of it. All, therefore, that is meant to be implied is that within these three great divisions the differences were slight compared with the resemblances. It was the language of the North and that of the South, as is stated by Higden, that stood the farthest apart. Between these two wavered the dialect of the Midland counties ; sometimes and in some places in- clining to the one, at other times and in other places inclining to the other. Each one of the three called itself the English speech, but did not deny the title to the others. Each one of the three also acted upon the speech of that other with which it came into 124 English Language immediate contact. Thus the East Midland affected the dialect of the South, and the Southern in turn affected the East Midland. For instance, the South- ern plural ending in -/// of the present tense — as they hopeth — made its appearance in works written in the Eastern Midland. Again, the Northern termination in -s of the second and third person singular of the present tense is often found in the West Mid- land. Accordingly we should have, for illustration, in this speech, thou gives and he gives in place of the Eastern Midland and Southern thou givest and he giveth. But one important thing these dialects had in com- mon. The influx of French words into their vocabu- lary was about the same in each, and occurred at about the same period. On whatever other points they differed, here they agreed. The Norman Con- quest did not bring Scotland under the sway of a for- eign race, nor were the Scottish Lowlands parcelled out among a body of nobles who spoke a strange tongue ; yet French words penetrated at about the same time, and to about the same extent, not only into the English spoken on both sides of the Humber, which divided the Northern dialect from the Midland, but also into the English spoken on both sides of the Tweed, which divided the two kingdoms. In the fourteenth century the language of Barbour, the Arch- deacon of Aberdeen, shows as much the trace of French influence as does that of his contemporary Chaucer, the controller of the port of London. The Differences between the Dialects. 125 introduction into our tongue of the Romance element was in no sense peculiar to the speech of any one dialect or any one district of country ; it was a gen- eral linguistic movement, which extended to every place where English was spoken at all. Differences between the Dialects. — It is obviously the differences between the two extreme dialects that are most marked, and to these the attention will be mainly directed. There was, in the first place, one great radical distinction between the speech of the North and of the South. The latter was extremely conservative in holding on to its grammatical inflec- tions ; the former let them go rapidly. In the general break-up of the Anglo-Saxon that followed the Con- quest, it was impossible to preserve the speech of any portion of the country from violent changes and cor- ruptions and losses. These effects showed themselves in the Southern dialect, but much less there than in either of the two others. It clung as firmly as it well could to the original forms and inflections ; and whatever it gave up, it gave up reluctantly. For evidence of this, we have a succession of literary monuments, which establish the slowness of the change that took place. We have no such means for tracing the linguistic history of the North as we have that of the South ; for, from about the end of the tenth century to the end of the thirteenth, no works were written in the language spoken in or descended from that spoken in the ancient Northumbria : or, if written, they have 126 English Language. not been preserved. But it is evident that the devel- opment of the Northern dialect was in the sharpest contrast to that of the Southern. It abandoned its inflections without hesitation. The works produced in it in the fourteenth century show, that, in its rejection of grammatical forms, it had even then frequently gone farther than the English we use has now, or, at any rate, had shown a disposition to go farther. One or two illustrations are all that will be needed at this point. The ending -s of the genitive is sometimes dropped : man saul appears for ' man's soul.' So is sometimes the ending -s of the third person singular of the pres- ent, and the -ed of the preterite, seen in such expres- sions as he think, ' he thinks,' and in he cumand, ' he commanded.' In fact, in the fourteenth century the Northern dialect had moved so far to the form now exhibited by Modern English, that a work written at that time, if printed in the existing orthography, would present but few and slight difficulties to the ordinary reader, so far as inflections and grammatical construc- tions are concerned. It was in respect to slowness or swiftness of change that the great characteristic difference manifested itself between the speech of the North and of the South. In some cases as a result of this, in others entirely independent of it, the two dialects showed marked divergencies. These concern partly the spelling, partly the vocabulary, and partly the grammar. A few illus- trations will be given to make this statement perfectly clear ; those peculiarities being chosen by preference Differences between the Dialects. 127 which have maintained themselves in Modern Eng- lish, either in the standard speech or in the Scottish dialect. First, as regards difference of orthography. The Southern dialect used the vowel o, where the North preferred a. Thus in Early English, land and lond, hom{e) and ham(e), would indicate the two regions where these particular forms prevailed. We see this further exemplified in the Anglo-Saxon pronoun hwa, which in the South became who, and in the North wha. Again, the Southern dialect was inclined to use the letter v for /, a tendency which was unknown to the North; thus the Anglo-Saxon fox, a 'fox,' and fixe/?, a ' female fox,' became in the Southern dialect vox and vixen ; and Modern English has retained the original form of the one, and the altered form of the other. Furthermore, the South was apt to turn the Anglo-Saxon c into eh, especially before the vowels e, i, and y, and at the end of a syllable ; whereas this letter was represented in the North by k. Accord- ingly, the Anglo-Saxon eiree, ' church,' became in the Southern dialect ehirehe, in the Northern kirk, still preserved in the Scottish dialect. Another illustration will be found in the case of the Anglo-Saxon verb seean, ' to seek.' This appeared respectively in the speech of the two regions as seche(n) and seke(n). In the simple verb we now use the Northern form seek, but in the compound beseech we follow the South. Secondly, as regards difference of vocabulary. The Northern dialect adopted a number of Scandina- 128 English Language vian words, brought in by the invasion and settle- ment of the Norsemen. Comparatively few of these found their way into the South ; though some of them were adopted into the speech of the Midland dialects, especially in those counties which had fallen under the sway of the Danes. Into these latter, indeed, they may have been introduced independently, and from this source have been transmitted to Modern English. In this way we can explain the early and wide use of such Norse words as ill, bound, 'ready, destined for,' and fro in phrases such as ' to and fro.' The Northern local dialects naturally retain these Scandinavian words in somewhat large num- bers ; as, for one instance that will do for many, the word gar, ' to cause,' may be adduced. This comes directly from the Norse verb g'ora. Thirdly, as regards grammatical differences. In this respect the general tendency, already mentioned, of the North to drop inflections altogether, and of the South to retain them as long as possible, formed nat- urally the great cardinal distinction between the two dialects. But besides this there are certain character- istic differences in the inflection itself. One of the most marked is in the plural of the present tense of the verb. In the Northern dialect this either ended in -s, or dropped the termination entirely. In the Southern the regular ending was -///. In this matter the former followed the Northumbrian dialect of Anglo-Saxon, the Litter the West-Saxon. Men say would therefore be represented respectively by men Differences between the Dialects. 129 says and men sayeth) These peculiarities lasted down in the literary language to a comparatively late period, though ordinarily not indicated in modern editions, as the text is, in this particular, silently changed when- ever possible. The usage can be seen in the following illustrations : — O father Abraham, what these Christians are Whose own hard dealings teaches them suspect The thoughts of others ! Shakspeare, Merchant of Venice, act i. scene 3. A board groaning under the heavy burden of the beasts that cheweth the cud. — Fletcher, Woman-Hater, act i. scene 2. Another marked grammatical difference was in the plural of the noun. In Old English, -s had become the regular termination of this number for all the dia- lects. But the Southern still continued to retain many plurals in -en. This form was based upon the Anglo- Saxon plural in -an, 2 which originally belonged to about half the nouns in the language, but exhibits in our present prose speech but one genuine survival in oxen. This termination, however,' was sometimes added in the Southern dialect to many nouns which etymologically had no right to it. From it in conse- quence we have Modern English plurals like brethren and children, (A. S. broSru and cilJru), which in a strict sense were at the outset corruptions. The not uncommon dialectic form housen is another illustra- tion of the fondness for this ending ; in Anglo-Saxon 1 See Part II., sec. 331. - lb., sees. 27 and 57. 130 English Language. the plural is the same as the singular. This termina- tion in -en was, in truth, sometimes given in the Southern dialect to nouns ending originally in -as, of which the representative was strictly -es. For example, we sometimes find kingen instead of the regular kinges, 1 kings.' On the other hand, the Northern dialect had scarcely any plurals in -en. In fact, the number ordinarily found in it comprised only the four words, eghen, ' eyes,' hosen, ' hose,' shoon, ' shoes,' and oxen. Between these two dialects stood that of the Mid- land counties, not merely in respect to position, but in respect to language also. It partook, to a large extent, of the peculiarities of each ; while in some particulars it was independent of both. Many ques- tions connected with its origin and development will remain unsettled, because some of its distinguishing characteristics must have come from a dialect or dialects*existing in the Anglo-Saxon period, which, however widely employed in colloquial speech, left no trace of itself or of themselves in written literature. Moreover, while it had from the very beginning an independent existence and growth, it could not fail to be affected largely by the two dialects on each side of it. Thus, as we have seen, in the fourteenth century three >great dialects existed in Britain, each calling itself English, each possessing a literature of its own, and each seemingly having about the same chance to be adopted as the^ representative national tongue. Of Differences between the Dialects. 1 3 I these three it was the Midland that became the lan- guage of literature, — the language we speak and write to-day. Its supremacy has involved, as one result, the degradation of the other two, with all their va- rieties, to the condition, in general, of local dialects, maintaining themselves as the speech of the rude and uneducated only, and destined, with the greater spread of education, to ultimate extinction. The question naturally arises, How did this result come about? There were several circumstances that concurred to give predominance to the Midland dialect. In the first place, it was in its nature a compromise between the two found on each side of it, and could, therefore, be much more readily adopted by both than could either by the other. We have already had a direct statement to this effect by a writer of the fourteenth century. 1 In the second place, it covered a larger extent of territory than either of the others. In par- ticular, the strength of the Northern dialect as a rival was much weakened by the fact that no small portion of the region in which it was spoken had from an early period been separated from England, and been placed under the rule of the king of the Scots. In the third place, the Midland was the speech of the district in which the two universities of Oxford and Cambridge were situated. Accordingly, all the powerful linguistic influences that flowed from these two great centres of higher education were constantly at work to extend the supremacy of the form of speech heard in them. 1 See page 118. # 132 English Language. In the fourth place, it was the Midland that became the tongue mainly employed at the court and the capital, as the French was gradually displaced from its position as the language of social intercourse. This last was an influence, which, powerful as it is at any period, was far more powerful then than it is almost possible for us now to conceive. All of these reasons contributed to give the Midland special prominence as the dialect destined to become the representative one of the whole nation. Yet, strong as these various agencies were in themselves, they were insufficient to establish its supremacy over the rest, and cause them to sink into subordinate posi- tions, of which not only others would be conscious, but which would be acknowledged as such by them- selves. No really national language could exist until a literature had been created which would be admired and studied by all who could read, and taken as a model by all who could write. It was only a man of genius that could lift up one of these dialects into a pre-eminence over the rest, or could ever give to the scattered forces existing in any one of them the unity and vigor of life. This was the work that Chaucer did. He it was that first showed to all men the re- sources of the language, its capacity of representing with discrimination all shades of human thought, and of conveying with power all manifestations of human feeling. His choice of the Midland, or rather the fact of his writing in it, raised it at once into a position of superiority which was never afterwards disputed. Differences between the Dialects. 133 His productions, scattered everywhere, unconsciously affected the speech of all who read, and were con- sciously looked upon by all who set out to write as the authoritative standard of expression. The words and grammatical forms he used, the methods of syntac- tical construction he followed, became the ones gen- erally adopted by his successors. With him, indeed, began the exercise of that great conservative restraint which literature throws about language, which arrests all sudden changes, and which, so long as it operates unimpaired, renders revolution or anarchy in the speech an impossibility. It has already been stated that the Midland dialect was not altogether uniform ; and that it has been divided into that of the Eastern and of the Western counties. It was in the former of these that Chaucer wrote. To speak with absolute precision, it is there- fore to be said that the cultivated English language, in which nearly all English literature of value has been written, sprang directly from the East Midland division of the Midland dialect, and especially from that variety of the East Midland which was spoken at London and the region immediately to the north of it. To that it owes the forms of its words and its leading grammati- cal characteristics, though in these respects it has likewise been influenced in particulars by the speech both of the North and of the South. The Scotch Dialect. — But, while these three dialects were in use in England, it was the Northern alone that was spoken in Scotland ; and, as the Scotch is the 134 English Language. only dialect of English that can be said to have a liter- ature of its own, a brief account of it is here in place. This Northern dialect had in that region gradually spread itself on every side from its original centre in the south, had crossed the Forth, and, steadily pressing back the Celtic tongues, had, in the fourteenth cen- tury made its way along the coast as far as the Moray Frith. Even had the speech of England and Scotland been precisely the same in the beginning, the political separation of the two countries, at a period when no literary standard existed anywhere, would of itself have been almost certain to develop, in process of time, differences between the tongues used in both. This inevitable divergence was largely increased by the fact that in the one country the Midland dialect established its supremacy and became the language of literature, while in the other, the Northern dialect was the only one ever employed at all, either in the lan- guage of literature or of common life. Accordingly, the speech of Scotland had a linguistic development in some measure independent of that found south of the Tweed. It is to be borne in mind, however, that Scotch, as an epithet applied to speech, meant originally the Gaelic of the Celtic inhabitants of Northern Britain. Its modern sense, as applied to one dialect of our lan- guage, was then not known. What we now call the Scotch tongue is nothing but a variety of Northern English. Furthermore, it was invariably called English by the men who wrote in it during the fourteenth and The Scotch Dialect. 135 fifteenth centuries, and generally by those who wrote in it during the sixteenth. During this last period, however, the term English began to be disused, and instead it was sometimes designated as the Scotch tongue, as opposed to the English. This would un- doubtedly have become the established practice had the two peoples remained under separate governments ; but the union of the crowns by the accession, in 1603, of James VI. of Scotland to the English throne as James L, caused the tongue of the smaller country to lose its independent position. After that date it came to be considered and called the Scotch dialect of the English language. Scotch literature may be said to begin with John Barbour, Archdeacon of Aberdeen, who died in 1395. He was the author of several works ; but the one by which he is principally known is the historical poem called the " Brus," which, as he himself tells us, he finished in 1375. It contains between thirteen and fourteen thousand lines, and celebrates the deeds of Robert Bruce, who successfully defended the indepen- dence of Scotland against the English. Barbour was followed by Andrew Wyntoun, prior of the monastery of St. Serf's Inch in Loch Leven. Between 1420 and 1424, he wrote a metrical history entitled the " Orygy- nale Cronykil of Scotland." Far the best work of this earlier period is the production of James I., who reigned nominally from 1406 to 1437, and actually ruled the country from 1424 to 1437. It is a poem of nearly fourteen hundred lines, and is called " The 136 English Language. Kinges Quair." 1 It was written in 1423, while he was in captivity in England, in honor of the daughter of the Earl of Somerset, who afterwards became his wife. The metrical histories of Barbour and Andrew of Wyntoun were continued in the latter half of the fif- teenth century by Henry the Minstrel, or Blind Harry, as he is more commonly called. In a poem of twelve thousand lines he celebrated the exploits, real or imaginary, of the Scottish hero, William Wallace. A contemporary of his was Robert Henryson of Dunferm- line, who wrote a number of poetical compositions. Among his writings may be mentioned a collection of thirteen fables, and " The Testament of Cresseid," a sequel to the " Troilus and Cressida " of Chaucer. The greatest name of all this early period is William Dunbar, who flourished from about 1460 to about 1520. His works are very various in their character, embracing a number of lyrical, allegorical, and satirical pieces. Con- temporary with him was Gawin Douglas, Bishop of Dun- keld, whose most famous production was his translation of Vergil's ".Eneid," with prologues of his own prefixed to each book. But perhaps the poet of the sixteenth century who was then most widely read by all classes was Sir David Lindsay. His popularity was largely due to his attacks on abuses that prevailed both in church and state, and his works are credited with having exerted considerable influence in forwarding the cause of the Reformation. 1 Quair, ' a book ' ; Modern English quire. The Scotch Dialect. 137 These are the most important of the Scotch authors who flourished during this early period. The litera- ture written in the Scotch dialect, after the union of the crowns, is often of a high order, particularly in lyric poetry. Much of it is characterized by a degree of excellence to which the literature before the union can rarely lay claim. This latter, indeed, has received great praise from some ; but to most readers the works belonging to it are apt to seem uninteresting, and they are certainly very long. In spite of the merit of occasional passages, and even of occasional poems, it must be said of early Scottish literature, that, taken as a whole, it requires patience to read it, and patriotism to admire it. The particular variety of the Northern dialect which was adopted in literature while Scotland remained an independent kingdom was that spoken in Edinburgh and its neighborhood. Here, as in most countries, the speech of the court and capital became the stand- ard speech. From the outset it was exposed to two influences that did not affect the language of England itself. There was, first, the tongue of the Celtic inhabitants, who formed so large a proportion of the population subject to the Scottish monarch. With this it came into immediate contact, and from it naturally borrowed some words. Secondly, there was for centuries a more or less close alliance between France and Scotland, brought about by their common hostility to England. Men from one country were often engaged in the service of the king of the other. 138 flish Bodies of French troops were occasionally stationed in Scotland. Hence it was that from that tongue wore introduced into the Scotch dialect a number o\ words never used, either in conversation or in writing, south of the Tweed. Furthermore, the Scotch language of literature was affected to some degree by the literary language oi its more powerful neighbor. The influence of Chaucer, both on style and manner of treatment, is very notice- able in the compositions of several of the early Scotch poets. It is. indeed, a signal illustration of the power over the development of a language exerted by an author of great genius, that many forms characteristic of the Midland dialect, but foreign to the Northern, were introduced from his works into the variety of the latter dialect in which early Scotch literature was com- posed, though they seem never to have maintained themselves there. The superiority of English liters ture could not. indeed, fail to make itself felt in the case of tongues so nearly allied. Still, had the two countries continued to be separate nationalities, differ- ences in speech would have become thoroughly estab- lished ; and in the island o\ (beat Britain there would have been, perhaps, two sister languages as distinct from one another as are. for instance, Spanish ami Portuguese. But, as has been pointed out. the union of the two ciowns at the beginning o\ the seventeenth century reduced the S< ottish, from the position o( a tongue independent of the English, to that o\ a dialect of it. Having no longer any common literal \ stand- 'I he Scotch Dialect. 139 ard within its iily di _ into a number il dialects. Each culiari- ties of it-; . and al! them, when used in literature, have been largely affected by the influence of the standard English. No small share of the poetry < in wh* in my translacyons I had ouer curyous termes whiche coude not be vnderstande of comyn peple, and desired me to vse olde and homely termes in my translacyons; and fayn wolde I satysfye euery man, and so to doo toke an olde booke and redde therin, and certaynly the Englysshe was so rude and brood that I coude not wele vnder- stande it. And also my lorde Abbot of Westmynster ded do shewe 3 to me late certayn euydences wryton in olfle Englysshe for to reduce it in to our Englysshe now vsid. And certaynly it was wreton in suche wyse that it was more lyke to Dutche than Englysshe. I coude not reduce ne brynge it to be vnder- stonden. And certaynly our langage now vsed varyeth ferre from that whiche was vsed and spoken whan I was borne. For we Englysshe men ben borne vnder the domynacion of the mone, whiche is ncuer stedfaste but ever wauerynge, wexynge one season and waneth and dycreaseth another season. And 1 Deliberated. 2 Feared. 3 Caused to be shown. 160 English Language. that comyn Englysshe, that is spoken in one shyre, varyeth from another. In so moche that in my dayes happened that certayn marchauntes were in a ship in Tamyse, for to haue sayled ouer the see into Zelande, and for lacke of vvynde thei taryed atte Forlond, and wente to land for to refreshe them. And one of theym, named Sheffelde, a mercer, cam in to an hows and axed for mete, and specyally he axyd after eggys. And the goode wyf answerde that she coude speke no Frenshe. And the mar- chaunt was angry, for he also coude speke no Frenshe, but wolde haue hadde egges, and she vnderstode hym not. And thenne at laste a nother sayd that he wolde haue eyren. Then the good wyf sayd that she vnderstod hym wel. Loo ! what sholde a man in thyse dayes now wryte, egges or eyren? Cer- taynly it is harde to playse euery man by cause of dyuersite and chaunge of langage. For in these dayes euery man that is in ony reputacyon in his countre wyll vtter his comynycacyon and maters in suche maners and termes that fewe men shall vnder- stonde theym. And som honest and grete clerkes haue ben wyth me and desired me to wryte the moste curyous termes that I coude fynde. And thus bytwene playn, rude and curyous I stande abasshed. But in my judgemente the comyn termes, that be dayli vsed, ben lyghter to be vnderstonde than the olde and auncyent Englysshe. And for as moche as this present booke is not for a rude vplondyssh man to laboure therein, ne rede it, but onely for a clerke and a noble gentylman that feleth and vnderstondeth in faytes of amies, in loue and in noble chyvalrye; therefor in a mcane bytwene bothe I have reduced and translated this sayd booke in to our Englysshe, not ouer rude ne curyous, but in suche termes as shall be vnderstanden by goddys grace accordynge to my copye. CHAPTER VIII. MODERN ENGLISH. 1550, . Up to this time in the nomenclature of the periods of the English tongue, and in the dates assigned to them, there has been among scholars a wide diversity of usage. In regard to the latest period, however, there is a pretty substantial agreement. There are some who assign its beginning to the year 1500 ; there are but very few who place it any earlier. Many refer it, as is done here, to the middle of the sixteenth century. There are those by whom it is specifically reckoned from the accession of Queen Elizabeth, which took place in 1558. No dates can ever be given in the history of the development of any tongue, against which some ob- jections cannot be brought. For convenience of ref- erence, a further subdivision of Modern English is desirable. In this work it will be separated into the three following periods. The first extends from 1550 to the year of the restoration of the Stuarts in the fol- lowing century, that is, to 1660 ; the second, from 1660 to a point in the latter part of the eighteenth century, 161 1 62 English Language. and in this the year 1 783, the date of the ending of the American Revolution, affords a convenient termi- nus ; the third period extends from 17S3 to the present time. Though the division is made primarily for convenience of reference, it will be found, that, on the whole, it is a satisfactory division for the historical treatment of both the language and the literature. Two facts have been pointed out in the previous chapter, to which it is now necessary to call special attention. One is, that, in highly cultivated tongues, changes in grammar always take place slowly, and, as a general rule, only after a long struggle. The other is, that, in such a tongue, changes in vocabulary, par- ticularly in the nature of additions to it, meet with no opposition, or with comparatively little. The reasons for this condition of things reveal themselves after short consideration. In early speech men think mainly of what they are going to say, not of the way in which they are to say it ; and the hearer or reader likewise cares so much more for the matter, that he does not consciously give much heed to the manner. In later times all this is reversed. The vehicle of the thought has then become a subject of consideration indepen- dent of die thought ; that is, language has begun to be studied for itself, as well as for what it conveys. When any tongue has reached this point of development, the opposition to change in established forms of ex- pression is sure to become exceedingly powerful. .Against such changes are arrayed all the authority of past usage, and all the prejudice in favor of what Changes in Modern English. 163 actually is existing, and has been found to do, though perhaps clumsily, the work demanded of it. In fact, it may be said that these changes never succeed in making themselves adopted, until the necessity for them is imperious enough to override the protests of professional purists, and the feeling of dislike to inno- vation which becomes almost a second nature in the cultivated users of speech. True as these statements are of any tongue, they are especially true of Modern English. The lexical changes that have gone on in it have been numerous. Very few old words, indeed, once in common use, have been utterly lost. Nor has there been very much alteration, comparatively speaking, in the mean- ings of the old words, though this has been far more frequent than the actual disappearance of these words themselves. It is the accessions to the vocabulary which in this respect is the most marked characteristic of the modern speech. Additions have been made to it and are continuing to be made to it on the most extensive scale. On the other hand, the grammatical changes have been exceedingly few. During the past four hundred years not a single one has taken place in the inflection of the noun, unless the assumption by two or three of the regular plural in -s 1 be so considered. In the inflection of the adjective there could be none, because, at the beginning of the Mod- ern English period, it had already been reduced to the root form. It is only in the inflection of the pro- 1 See page 149. 164 English Language. noun and the verb that certain changes can be found. Of these an account of the most important will be given. Changes in the Inflection. — The Pronoun. — The latter half of the sixteenth century witnessed the rise, or at least the general prevalence, of a confusion in the use of the nominative and objective cases of the personal pronouns and of the interrogative and rela- tive who. /and me, we and us, thou and thee , ye and you, he and him, she and her, who and whom, are not unfrequently used without distinction. 1 This practice must have characterized the colloquial speech, because it is especially noticeable in the literature that represents it, the writings of the Eliza- bethan dramatists; though the extent of its preva- lence is largely disguised in modern reprints of their works by the silent changes of the original made by editors. The confusion in the use of the nominative and the objective is more pronounced in the case of some of these pronouns than of others. In the plural of that of the second person it has established itself permanently in the speech. Ye, in the language of Chaucer, invariably denotes the nominative; you, the objective; and this usage will still be found ob- served in the authorized version of the Bible. But in the fifteenth century the distinction, owing to special reasons, begin to break down, and before the end of the sixteenth, the two forms were used in- terchangeably for each other. 2 At the present time 1 Set- Part II., note to sec. 117. 2 lb. sec. 115. The Pronoun in Modern English. 165 the original nominative ye, though occasionally found, is practically supplanted by the form you, which etymologically belongs only to the dative and to the accusative; and in turn, ye, when now used at all, is more often in the objective case than in the nomina- tive. But numerous phrases such as between you and I, it is him, it is her, sprang up at that period and have lasted down in colloquial speech to our own day. To a large extent most of them have also been used in literature, and there have been times when they have been almost as common as the strictly more correct forms. Etymologically it is me is as proper as it is you ; but the former expression gener- ally incurs the censure of modern grammarians. Colloquial speech has likewise retained to a large extent the use of who for whom, in questions such as Who did you go to see ? or Who are you talking about? and others of the same general character. These abound in the literature which represents the lan- guage of conversation through all the periods of Modern English. They are still constantly heard, and in some instances are so much more common than the strictly correct expressions, that the use of the latter seems at times to partake almost of the nature of pedantry. Of all the parts of speech the pronoun is the most adverse to the introduction of any new forms; yet to its limited number the close of the sixteenth century saw the addition of its. The genitive of // (originally 1 66 English Language. hit) is etymologically his ; 1 but this is also the geni- tive of he. It was inevitable that confusion should arise in the use of this one form applied equally to an object with life and to one without life, as soon as the system of grammatical gender had passed away. Confusion did arise; and expedients of all kinds were resorted to for the sake of securing clearness. Sometimes, as is the case in the English Bible, of it and thereof were used; as, for instance: — Two cubits and a half was the length of it. — Exodus xxxvii. I. Two cubits and a half was the length (hereof. — lb. 6. Sometimes the was employed, as in the following example : — For we see that it is the manner of men to scandalize and deprave that which retaineth the state and virtue, by taking ad- vantage of that which is corrupt and degenerate. — Bacon, Ad- vancement of Learning. More frequently still it was used itself as a genitive, as follows : — The hedge-sparrow fed the cuckoo so long, That it had it head bit off by it young. SHAKSPEARE, King Lear, i. 4. Finally, both the and it were very commonly joined with own, making such phrases as the own and it own. The following is an example: — That which groweth of it own accord of thy harvest, thou shalt not reap. — Leviticus xxv. 5 (original edition). 1 See Part II., sec. 103. The Pronoun in Modern English. 167 In this verse the Bishop's Bible (1572) had the own. The most usual method to avoid ambiguity was, however, to change the construction of the sentence. All these difficulties led to the formation of its. The first record of its appearance in print that has yet been found belongs to the year 1598, where it occurs in one of the definitions of an Italian and English dictionary, entitled "A Worlde of Wordes," by John Florio. Its infrequency is made conspicuous by the fact that it appears but ten times in Shakspeare's works. With Ben Jonson (1573-1637) it is much more common, and it certainly occurs in the writings of Decker, Webster, Beaumont and Fletcher, and probably in those of all the dramatists who immedi- ately followed Shakspeare. By the middle of the seventeenth century it had become thoroughly estab- lished. Still the fact that Milton (161 2-1674) uses it but three times in his poetry, and rarely in his prose, shows that in the minds of some there was a prejudice still lingering against it. By the end of that century, however, its comparatively recent origin seems to have been entirely forgotten. Dryden, writing after the Restoration, even censures Ben Jonson for his bad grammar in using his where its, he says, would have been the appropriate word. Verb. — In the verb the inflectional changes have been of more importance. One of them is purely special. This is the complete transition of the form be of the substantive verb from the indica- 1 68 liug/is/i Language. tive to the subjunctive mood. In Elizabethan Eng- lish be is found frequently alongside of are, at least in the third person of the plural. The practice may be illustrated by the following: — Where be thy brothers? Where be thy two sons? Wherein dost thou joy? Who sues and kneels and says, God save the queen? Where be the bending peers that flattered thee? Where be the thronging troops that followed thee? 1 This practice continues to be maintained in those two great conservators of archaic expression, — the language of poetry and of low life. In the latter it still occurs constantly, in the former occasionally. But be early began, in literary prose, to be confined to the subjunctive mood; and this has now become the established practice in the ordinary cultivated speech. A second change has been the gradual substitution of -s for -th as the termination of the third person singular of the present indicative. In the Midland dialect of the Eastern counties, from which literary English directly sprang, this part of the verb ended invariably in -th. Such was the practice of Chaucer and of those of his contemporaries, who wrote in that dialect or in the Southern. If any of them occasionally Qsed the form in -s, it was ordinarily due to the de- sire of accommodating the rhyme. On the other hand, this third person regularly ended in -s in the North- 1 SHAKSPEARE'S Richard III., act iv. scene 4. The Verb in Modern English. 169 ern dialect. From this dialect it began to make its way into literary English in the former half of the sixteenth century. The practice of employing it be- came more and more prevalent, and by the end of that century it is found, at least in some writers, full as frequently as the ending in -///. The two forms are in fact used interchangeably, as in the following line from Shakspeare : — " It blesseth him that gives and him that takes." Accordingly, during most of the first period of Modern English the terminations -s and -th flour- ished side by side, neither seeming to have any preference in popular estimation; but, toward the latter part of it, the former ending became the one generally used, and with the progress of time gradu- ally displaced the other. That the termination -th did not die out entirely is probably due to the influ- ence of the English Bible. Though the authorized version of that work appeared as late as 161 1, the language used in it belonged, as is well known, to the early portion of the preceding century. In it the ending is throughout in -th ; it never, for instance, says he makes, but invariably he maketh. To this is due the preservation of the form, and the additional circumstance that it is now almost entirely confined to the language of religion. There is nothing more supremely characteristic of our speech, especially in its later periods, than the extent to which it has developed the use of passive 170 English Language. formations. In this respect it has gone far beyond any other cultivated modern tongue. The discussion of this belongs mostly to syntax, and needs here nothing beyond simple reference. But the tendency in this direction which the language has long mani- fested, has had, as one result, the addition during the past hundred years, of entirely new verb-phrases, made up of the present and past tenses of the substan- tive verb, and of past participles compounded with being. The history of this idiom presents a striking instance of the difficulty in which the decay of old forms leaves a language, and the ingenuity it displays in striking out new paths to expression. Anglo-Saxon had no special form for the passive. To represent, for instance, the present of that voice, it combined the past participle of any particular verb with the present tense of either the verbs we sail and beon, 'to be,' or the verb weordan, 'to become.' This last was preserved in Early English in the form worthe{ri), and like the corresponding German word werden, was not unfrequently used to form the passive; though in our tongue it conveyed usually and perhaps invariably a future signification. The fol- lowing lines will exemplify it: — For ho so doth wel here at the daye of dome Worth faire vnderfonge by-for God that tyme. 1 But worthe, in process of time, disappeared from the 1 For who so doth well here, at the day of doom Shall be fairly received before God that time. Piers Plowman, Text C, Passus X., line 321. New Passive Formation. 171 language, and the tenses of the verb be became the only ones that were combined with the past partici- ple to express the passive relation. This it could easily do for the present tense, when the verb whose participle was used denoted a feeling which was in its nature continuous. ' The man is loved, is feared, is admired,' were expressions which presented no difficulty or ambiguity. They were genuine present tenses of the passive voice. But, when the verb whose participle was used denoted a simple act, the combination of the passive participle with the present tense of the verb be had the effect of giving to the full verbal phrase, not the sense of some- thing which was then actually taking place, but of something which had already taken place. It was a completed, not an existing action, which was signi- fied by it. 'The man is shot, is wounded, is killed,' could not well be employed of anything else than a finished result, not of an action going on to a possi- ble result. It was not a present tense that was denoted, but a past. The most common way taken to avoid the difficulty was to change the form of expression. Thus, in the case of the examples just given, resort could be had to inversion, and such sentences as 'they are shoot- ing, are wounding, are killing the man,' could be employed. But these were often cumbrous and unsat- isfactory. Accordingly, various circumlocutions came into use to express the idea conveyed by the passive. One of these was to join the present of the verb be, 172 English Lang 11 age. to the verbal substantive in -ing, governed by the preposition on or in. The preposition, in time, took the form of a, or, rather, was corrupted into it by slovenly pronunciation, and was then usually joined directly to the substantive. In this way arose ex- pressions like 'the house is a-building,' 'the brass is a-forging, ' 'the dinner is a-preparing, ' From the verbal substantive finally fell away the preposition. This left the verbal phrase designed to denote the passive relation precisely the same as the verbal phrase compounded of the substantive verb be and the present participle, which is one of the methods of forming the present tense of the active voice. The transition which the phrase underwent can be exhib- ited by using the first of the illustrations given. The following are the three forms : — The house is in building. The house is a-building. The house is building. It is obvious that this method of denoting the pas- sive could be carried out on only a limited scale. It was but rarely the case that a subject with life could be given to a passive verbal phrase of the kind. In 'the house is building,' and 'the man is building,' it is obvious at a glance that the idea conveyed by is building is essentially distinct. In the one case is building is in the active voice; in the other it is in the passive. Nor would the difficulty have been removed, had the preposition been retained. 'The New Passive Formation. 173 man is a-eating' could not by any possibility be looked upon as a passive formation, and made to mean that the subject of the verb was undergoing the process of being eaten. Some other method of expression was felt to be necessary. Accordingly, in the eighteenth century, a new verb-phrase, made up of the substantive verb and the past participle compounded with being, came into use. We see it exemplified in the com- mon example 'the house is being built,' in which the new inflection is made up of is, and the compound past participle being built. Like the forms com- pounded with do, these phrases were confined to the present and preterite tenses. Their employment speedily became common. Though they met with vigorous opposition, they were found so clear in meaning, and so convenient in practice, that opposi- tion was of no avail. They have been adopted by every living writer of repute, and may now be con- sidered thoroughly established. Double methods of expression, like 'the house is building,' and 'the house is being built,' will in some cases doubtless continue to exist side by side for a long time to come ; but no new ones of the former kind will make their way into general use, while there is no percep- tible limit to the spread of those of the latter. These constitute the important inflectional changes that have taken place in Modern English. Certain inflections, indeed, have died out entirely during this period, such as the use of his as the genitive of 174 English Language. it, and of the plurals of the present tense ending in -tii, in -th, or in -s ; but these at the very beginning of the period were already on the point of extinction. There are other grammatical changes, mostly syntacti- cal in their nature, into which the limits of this work do not suffer us to enter. The character of them may be gathered from one or two illustrations. The name of the subjunctive mood still continues to exist in our tongue; but its employment as conveying any shade of meaning distinct from that of the indica- tion has largely passed away. This has arisen mainly from the fact that the forms of the one mood are in great measure the same as those of the other. As a result, the distinction that once prevailed in the use of the two gradually disappeared, and when the subjunc- tive is now employed, the indicative can be generally substituted for it without affecting the meaning. So also in Early English the double negative strengthened the negation. Thus Chaucer, to emphasize the cour- tesy of the Knight, puts four negatives into the two following lines: — He nevere yet no vileynye ' tie sayde In al his lyf unto no maner wight.' 2 In the first period of Modern English this use of the double negative to strengthen the negation was abandoned under the influence of the Latin. In fact it can almost be said that the use of the double negative itself has been given up, for it is now rarely 1 Discourteous language. 2 No sort of person. Vocabulary of Modern English. 175 employed -even to indicate an affirmative. Still though frowned upon by the cultivated speech, the original idiom exhibits all its early vitality in the language of low life. Questions like these, con- nected with the history of usage, would require a special work for their proper discussion. Changes in the Vocabulary. — It is in the vocabu- lary that the greatest changes have taken place, and are still taking place, in Modern English; though they have never been of such a kind and extent as to affect radically the character and continuity of the speech. A certain number of words, such, for illustra- tion as ear, 'to plough,' leasing, 'a lie,' have dropped out of use; but in most instances these terms had already begun at the beginning of the period to assume a somewhat archaic character. In general, it may be said that the losses in words have been comparatively slight, while the gains have been numerous. At the same time, these gains are far from having been spread equally over the history of the modern tongue. The period from 1550 to 1660 is especially remark- able for the vast number of new terms that came into the language, though the movement in that direction had begun some time before the middle of the six- teenth century. Much the largest proportion of these new words came from the Latin, but to some extent they were borrowed from the Greek, and from the modern tongues, the French, the Spanish, and the Italian. The disposition to introduce these foreign words 176 English Language. had manifested itself, as we have said, in the early part of the sixteenth century ; but it did not get under full headway until the latter half. It was a natural re- sult of the causes then in operation. It was a time of great activity and intense excitement. The intel- lectual impulse which had been set in motion by the revival of letters was still in its first vigor. It had rent the Christian Church into two hostile camps, using against each other, in defence of their dogmas, all the resources of the common learning of the past and the new learning that was coming in. A world hitherto unknown had been laid open to view. Fresh explorations were constantly bringing to light fresh facts. The rapid increase of knowledge and of the develop- ment of thought needed new words for their expres- sion ; and new words were accordingly introduced without stint or hesitation. The readiest resource at that time of the English-speaking race was the Latin ; and there was scarcely a single author of that period who did not feel himself at perfect liberty to coin from it any terms which seemed to him to express more exactly the ideas he sought to convey. The consequence was that vast multitudes of words came then into our tongue, numbers of which have not as yet been collected into our dictionaries, and perhaps, in some cases, have never had any existence outside of the written speech. Certainly many of them never came into general use, and it is not unlikely that no small proportion of them were confined to the indi- vidual authors who invented them. In conformity Vocabulary of Modern English. ijy with the terminology previously used, this influx is often called the " Latin of the Fourth Period." But, at the time of the restoration of the Stuarts, the intellectual impulse above mentioned had practically spent its force. The period from 1660 to 1783 was a critical rather than a creative age ; and it added but a small amount to the English vocabulary. This state of things, however, was again broken up towards the close of the eighteenth century. A great political and humanitarian revolution was in progress throughout Europe. It was attended, not merely with a social upheaval, but with a general intellectual movement, which presents many striking resemblances to that of the sixteenth century. One direct result was the introduction of a vast number of new words, which the rapid advance in every department of human investigation has rendered necessary. Some of these, to be sure, are nothing but revivals of terms which had previously been brought in during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, but had fallen into disuse ; but much the larger proportion of them are entirely new coinages. Especially is this true in the manifold departments of modern science, in which every ad- vance gives birth to a number of hitherto unknown words. These, in most instances, are taken from the Greek. To a large extent, they are purely technical in their character ; but, with the progress of the arts, a certain number are sure to pass into general circula- tion. There is still another characteristic which has 178 English Language. marked the later development of the English vocabu- lary. During the past hundred years, our tongue has shown a decided tendency to go back to its older forms, and to revive a large number of words that have been kept alive only in the provincial dialects. This is a tendency which the constantly increasing attention paid to the study of English in its earlier stages has naturally accelerated. The result is that many terms which were once known to but few are now familiar to all. The language of the sixteenth and even of the fourteenth century is much nearer to us than it was to the men of the eighteenth century. Its words and phrases require far fewer explanations. This is a condition of things which will be apt to char- acterize more and more the future. Under any cir- cumstances, the continued and indeed ever-increasing popularity of the great writers of Modern English is sufficient to prevent the terms they use from becom- ing obsolete, or the language itself to wander far away from the forms which they have made familiar. The fact of English possessing, to a large extent, a double vocabulary — one composed of Teutonic, the other of Romance words — has given a marked char- acter to the literature of various epochs. At any time, to be sure, a difference of terms employed will always be due to a difference of subject. It has already been pointed out, that the language of reason- ing and philosophy, of intellectual processes of any kind, will necessarily make extensive use of the Latin element ; while, on the contrary, the language of feel- Vocabulary of Modern English. 179 ing, in whatever shape manifested, will be mainly taken from the Teutonic element. But, even in treat- ing of subjects of a similar character, different writers living at the same time will vary widely in their choice of words. Moreover, it may be said that the literary speech has shown a constant tendency to oscillate between the two vocabularies. During the first pe- riod, from 1550 to 1660, the Latin influence was plainly predominant. It affected, not alone the words, but also the construction. The involved and stately sentences of Bacon, Hooker, and Milton, belong to a species of writing which is no longer cultivated ; in- deed, it is only in the dramatists of the Elizabethan age, that anything closely resembling modern prose can then be found. During the second period — that between 1660 and 1 783 — the two elements of the vocabulary were, in the main, harmoniously blended, though during the latter part of it, under the influence of Johnson, a temporary reaction occasionally manifested itself in favor of the Latin. But even this speedily passed away. On the other hand, during the last period of Modern English, and especially at the present time, a reaction in favor of the Teutonic element has set in. In spite of the immense accessions to the vocabu- lary from the classical tongues, due to the progress of science, it is probably true that the proportion of words of native origin used by popular writers, as con- trasted with words of foreign origin, is greater now than at any time during the past three hundred years. i8o English Language. But the history of the language shows that there is nothing permanent about any of these movements, whether in favor of the Teutonic or of the Romance element of our tongue. Both are essential to the speech in its present form, and a marked preference for the one, to the exclusion of the other, can, at best, be never anything more than a temporary fashion. Settlement of the Orthography. — During the Modern English period the orthography has become fixed. The form of the word remains the same, though it maybe pronounced in half a dozen different ways. Originally this was not the case. In the earlier periods of the language, the orthography may fairly be described as phonetic, as far, at least, as it could be made such with the imperfect means furnished by the Latin alphabet for the representation of English sounds. It continued to retain this character even after it had been affected by the orthography of the Old French. Accordingly, each one tried to spell as he pronounced ; and, as pronunciation varied in different parts of the country, the spelling necessarily varied with it. Many causes have contributed to bringing about the present unphonetic character of the English tongue. A most important factor in giving it fixedness of form was the influence exerted by the art of printing, in the practice of which uniformity of spelling is a matter of much consequence. Still this uniformity was a result very gradually reached. In the progress towards the modern orthography the seventeenth Orthography of Modern English. 1 8 1 century shows a clear advance over the sixteenth. Even in the early part of it the majority of words are spelled as they are now. In many variations exist from that at present universally found, as well as between that employed at the time itself in different printing-houses or by different writers. As illustra- tions of the former, the final -e frequently appeared in many words from which it is now discarded, as, for -example, doe, finde, beene, unknowne, heate, kinde, sootie, againe. The e of the genitive and plural was often retained, as in yeares, dreamcs, mindes, houres. The present final -y is frequently represented by ie, as easie and busie. Numerous other examples could be cited of variations from the orthography now em- ployed ; but these are sufficient to indicate, in a gen- eral way, their nature. The latter part of the seventeenth century shows the progress towards the modern form very plainly. At the beginning of the eighteenth century the present orthography was pretty nearly established ; though, in regard to numerous words, there was still wide diversity of usage. It was not until after the publication of Dr. Johnson's dictionary, in 1755, that the existing spell- ing can be said to have become universally received. That given by him to words has been the one gener- ally followed by all later writers. The variations that have taken place in the orthography since his time have been neither numerous nor important. One of the most significant, for instance, though in itself really insignificant, is the general dropping of the final -k 1 82 English Language. from such words as domestick, musick, publick, as they were authorized in his dictionary. Worse than all, a deference has sprung up for our present spelling which is not justified by anything in its character. Orthog- raphy was a matter about which Johnson was totally incompetent to decide. Yet, largely in consequence of the respect and even reverence still paid to that which he saw fit to employ, the spelling of English continues to be probably the most vicious to be found in any cultivated tongue that ever existed. With a number of sounds for the same sign, and again with a number of signs for the same sound, it is in no sense a guide to pronunciation, which is its only proper office. Even for derivation — an office for which it was never designed — it is almost equally worthless, save in the case of words of direct Latin origin. Wide Extension of English. — During the modern period of its history, English has been carried over a large share of the habitable globe, and the number of those who speak it is constantly increasing. Under conditions that existed in former times, this fact could be followed but by one result. Different tongues would have sprung up in different countries, varying from each other, and varying more or less from their common mother ; and the differences would have constantly tended to become more marked with the progress of time. But there are two agencies now in existence that will be more than sufficient to prevent any such result. These are, first, the common pos- session of a great literature accessible to men of every Future of the English Tongue. 183 rank and every country ; and, secondly, the constant interchange of population that results from the facility of modern communication. Joined to these is the steadily increasing attention paid to the diffusion of education, the direct effect of which is to destroy dia- lectic differences, and make the literary speech the one standard to which all conform. These agencies become year by year more wide-reaching and controlling. The forces that tend to bring about unity are now so much more powerful than those that tend to bring about diversity, and the former are so constantly gaining in strength, that deviation on any large scale between the language as spoken in Great Britain and in its Colonies, and in America, can now be looked upon as hardly possible. This brings us directly to the discussion of a ques- tion with which the general history of English may properly conclude : What is to be the future of our tongue ? Is it steadily tending to become corrupt, as constantly asserted by so many who are laboriously devoting their lives to preserve it in its purity? The fact need not be denied, if by it is meant, that, within certain limits, the speech is always moving away from established usage. The history of language is the his- tory of corruptions. The purest of speakers uses every day, with perfect propriety, words and forms, which, looked at from the point of view of the past, are im- proper, if not scandalous. But the blunders of one age become good usage in the following, and, in proc- ess of time, grow to be so consecrated by custom and 184 Engl is J i Language. consent, that a return to practices theoretically correct would seem like a return to barbarism. While this furnishes no excuse for lax and slovenly methods of expression, it is a guaranty that the indulgence in them by some, or the adoption of them by all, will not necessarily be attended by any serious injury to the tongue. Vulgarity and tawdriness and affectation, and numerous other characteristics which are manifested by the users of language, are bad enough ; but it is a gross error to suppose that they have of themselves any permanently serious effect upon the purity of national speech. They are results of imperfect train- ing ; and, while the great masters continue to be admired and read and studied, they are results that will last but for a time. The causes which bring about the decline of a lan- guage are, in truth, of an entirely different type. It is not the use of particular words or idioms, it is not the adoption of peculiar rhetorical devices, that con- tribute either to the permanent well-being or corrup- tion of any tongue. These are the mere accidents of speech, the fashion of a time which passes away with the causes that gave it currency. Far back of these lie the real sources of decay. Language is no better and no worse than the men who speak it. The terms of which it is composed have no independent vitality in themselves : it is the meaning which the men who use them put into them, that gives them all their power. It is never language in itself that becomes weak or corrupt : it is only when those who use it Future of tlte English Tongue. 1S5 become weak or corrupt, that it shares in their degra- dation. Nothing but respect need be felt or expressed for that solicitude which strives to maintain the purity of speech ; yet when unaccompanied by a far-reaching knowledge of its history, but, above all, by a thorough comprehension of the principles which underlie the growth of language, efforts of this kind are as certain to be full of error as they are lacking in result. There has never been a time in the history of Modern Eng- lish in which there have not been men who fancied that they foresaw its decay. From the sixteenth to the nineteenth century on, our literature, whenever it touches upon the character of the vehicle by which it is conveyed, is full of the severest criticism ; and its pages are crowded with unavailing protests against the introduction of that which now it hardly seems possible for us to do without, and, along with these, with mournful complaints of the degeneracy of the present, and with melancholy forebodings for the future. So it always has been ; so it is always likely to be. Yet the real truth is, that the language can be safely trusted to take care of itself, if the men who speak it take care of themselves ; for with their degree of development, of cultivation, and of character, it will always be found in absolute harmony. In fact, it is not from the agencies that are com- monly supposed to be corrupting that our speech at the present time suffers; it is in much more danger from ignorant efforts made to preserve what is called its purity. Rules have been and still are laid down 1 86 English Language. for the use of it, which never had any existence out- side of the minds of grammarians and verbal critics. By these rules, so far as they are observed, freedom of expression is cramped, idiomatic peculiarity destroyed, and false tests for correctness set up, which give the ignorant opportunity to point out supposed error in others ; while the real error lies in their own imperfect acquaintance with the best usage. One illustration will be sufficient of multitudes that might be cited. There is a rule of Latin syntax that two or more sub- stantives joined by a copulative require the verb to be in the plural. This has been foisted into the grammar of English, of which it is no more true than it is of modern German. There is nothing in the usage of the past, from the very earliest times, to authorize it ; nothing in the usage of the present to justify it, except so far as the rule itself has tended to make general the practice it imposes. The grammar of English, as exhibited in the utterances of its best writers and speakers, has, from the very earliest period, allowed the widest discretion as to the use either of the singu- lar or the plural in such cases. The importation and imposition of rules foreign to its idiom, like the one just mentioned, does more to hinder the free develop- ment of the tongue, and to dwarf its freedom of ex- pression, than the widest prevalence of slovenliness of speech, or of affectation of style ; for these latter are always temporary in their character, and are sure to be left behind by the advance in popular cultivation, or forgotten through the change in popular taste. Future of the English Tongue. 187 It cannot indeed be laid down too emphatically that it is not the business of grammarians or scholars to decide what is good usage. Their function is lim- ited to ascertaining and recording it. This can only be done by the prolonged and careful study of the language, as it has been employed by its best authors. It is they who settle by their practice what is correct or incorrect, and not the arbitrary preferences or prejudices of writers on usage or grammar. These constantly assume an authority to which they are not entitled. Ignorant of their own ignorance, they con- demn because they fail to understand. The grammar of different periods does, it is true, vary to some ex- tent. What is right at one time may become wrong at another. Still, as a general rule, he who studies faithfully the great masters of English literature need rarely feel any hesitation about adopting the words or phrases or expressions which have received the sanc- tion of their usage. Of the languages of Christendom, English is the one now spoken by far the largest number of persons ; and from present appearances there would seem to be but little limit to its possible extension. Yet that it or any other tongue will ever become a universal language is so much more than doubtful, that it may be called impossible ; and, even were it possible, it is a question if it would be desirable. However that may be, its spread will depend in the future, as it has depended in the past, not so much upon the charac- 1 88 Eug/is/i Language-. ter of the language itself, as upon the character of the men who speak it. It is not necessarily because it is in reality superior to other tongues, that it has become more widely extended than they, but because it has been and still is the speech of two great nations which have been among the foremost in civilization and power, the most greedy in the grasping of territory, the most successful in the planting of colonies. But as political reasons have lifted the tongue into its present prominence, so in the future to political rea- sons will be owing its progress or decay. Thus, behind everything that tends to the extension of language, lie the material strength, the intellectual development and the moral character, which make the users of a language worthy enough and powerful enough to impose it upon others. No speech can do more than express the ideas of those who employ it at the time. It cannot live upon its past meanings, or upon the past conceptions of great men that have been recorded in it, any more than the race which uses it can live upon its past glory or its past achieve- ments. Proud, therefore, as we may now well be of our tongue, we may rest assured, that, if it ever attain to universal sovereignty, it will do so only because the ideas of the men who speak it are fit to become the ruling ideas of the world, and the men themselves are strong enough to carry them over the world ; and that, in the last analysis, depends, like everything else, upon the development of the individual ; depends, not upon the territory we buy or steal, not upon the gold we Future of the English Tongue. 189 mine, or the grain we grow, but upon the men we produce. If we fail there, no national greatness, however splendid to outward view, can be anything but temporary and illusory ; and, when once national greatness disappears, no past achievement in literature, however glorious, will perpetuate our language as a liv- ing speech, though they may help for a while to retard its decay. Part II. HISTORY OF INFLECTIONS. CHAPTER I. SOME FEATURES COMMON TO ALL THE TEUTONIC TONGUES. i. He who contrasts the English of the Anglo-Saxon period with the English of to-day is at once struck by the difference between the ancient and the modern tongue in respect to vocabulary and inflection. It is with the latter alone that we have to do in the following pages. Its history is largely a record of abandonment of forms once deemed necessary, and of confusion in the use of those that were retained. Nevertheless, it would be a great error to suppose that loss or change of inflection is especially characteristic of the later life of our language as distinguished from the earlier. Even when our speech made its first ap- pearance in a few written monuments of the seventh and eighth centuries, it had then already given up much that once belonged to it. The stripping of inflection from the English tongue had begun long before any productions which have been handed down had been composed in it. Many of the irregular forms which are still found at this day owe their existence, and their apparently anomalous character, to changes »93 194 English Language. that had taken place before a word of our language had been committed to writing ; in periods, indeed, as to which it is absolutely unknown where even the men were living who spoke our speech. 2. But, without the aid of written monuments, how can we know this to be a fact? How can we be sure that forms once existed in our tongue which have never been preserved in its literature ? The answer to these questions not only renders necessary an ac- count of the characteristics of the inflection prevailing in the earliest period of English, but, to some extent, also an examination of certain features which are common to it with the other Teutonic tongues. Its precise relations to them, the grammatical peculiarities that distinguish them all, must be clearly comprehended, before the student can understand the reason of the general tendencies which have manifested themselves in the history of our inflection, or the origin of the particular anomalies which are still retained in it. 3. It has already been stated that English is a mem- ber of a family of languages, called the Teutonic or Germanic, which itself forms one branch of a still larger family, termed the Indo-European, or the Aryan. 1 All the tongues belonging to the latter have come from the same source. They are, therefore, more or less remotely allied to one another. But no record of this one primitive Indo-European speech exists, no monuments of it have been preserved, from which its words and forms can be gathered. We are, 1 See introductory chapter. The Primitive Teutonic Speech. 195 therefore, under the necessity of making out what these words and forms must have been, by a compari- son, in accordance with certain scientific principles, of the languages that have been derived from this un- known original tongue. Words and forms which are common to all its descendants, it is very safe to say, must have existed in the parent-speech. In most cases they are naturally more changed and disguised in appearance, the more remote they are from it in time. Looked at from this point of view, it may be said that, as a general rule, the older the tongue, the closer is the resemblance it is likely to bear to the original from which it came. Accordingly, Sanskrit, with a literature going back to at least fifteen hundred, and probably two thousand, years before Christ, is conceded to be much nearer, on the whole, in its forms and inflections, to the primitive Indo-European than any of its numerous sister-languages. 4. A similar statement is true of that branch of the Indo-European family to which English belongs. There are in existence no monuments of the primitive Teutonic speech from which all the members of the branch have descended. The words and forms con- stituting it can only be made out, in the same manner as in the case of the primitive Indo-European, by a scientific comparison of those found in the derived tongues. Necessarily, the older languages of this branch, of which monuments have been handed down, are of the first importance. Of these the Gothic, whose scanty literature goes back to the fourth cen- 196 EnglisJi Language. tury after Christ, must be regarded as presenting, on the whole, much the nearest likeness to that theoreti- cal primitive Teutonic speech which is the common parent of all. But the other older languages belonging to this sub-family are also of importance. These are the Old Norse, the Old High German, and the Low- Germanic tongues, the Low Prankish, the Old Saxon, the Old Frisian, and that English of the earliest period which has had given to it in ordinary usage the name of Anglo-Saxon. 5. All these tongues had many things in com- mon. In particular, loss of inflection not only charac- terized the primitive Teutonic as compared with the primitive Indo-European, but also characterized the members of the Teutonic branch as compared with their immediate parent. Some of the earliest tongues retained more than others ; the Gothic, as the old- est, naturally retained the most of any. Each one of them, however, clung to particular forms and in- flections which the others had given up partly or wholly. Before considering the special later history of English, it is therefore desirable to point out some general resemblances which existed between it in its earliest state, and the sister-languages of the same Teutonic branch. When once the common basis from which they started is understood, the later relations of each to the others immediately become much clearer. Especially does the later history of our tongue have light thrown upon it by the development which has characterized the rest. We shall, in this place, limit Case in the Primitive Teutonic. 197 ourselves to the general features that mark the inflec- tion of the noun, the adjective, and the pronoun, in order to make plain the loss sustained by the primitive Teutonic as compared with the primitive Indo-Euro- pean, and further the loss of the English as compared with the parent Teutonic. The characteristics of the verb, so far as they are examined at all, will be dis- cussed by themselves. 6. Case. — The primitive Indo-European had eight cases. These were the nominative, the subject of the sentence ; the accusative, the case of the direct object ; the dative, the case of the indirect object ; the genitive, the case of general relation, or the of case ; the instru- mental, the case denoting accompaniment and means, the with or by case ; the ablative, the case denoting separation, the from case ; the locative, the case de- noting the place where any thing is or is done, the at or in case ; and the vocative, or the case of address. All of these were originally distinguished by difference of ending. But the tendency showed itself, from the earliest period of which we have any record, to give up one or more of these case-forms. When this result occurred, one of two things happened. Either the place of the case that was abandoned was taken by another case with a preposition, or one case was made to do the duty of another in addition to its own. Thus, in Latin, the ablative was required to perform the instru- mental relation, and, in Greek, the genitive the ablative relation. 7. Of these eight cases the primitive Teutonic still 198 English Language. retained six, though only four of them could be said to exist in full vigor. The two that were lost from this branch were the ablative and the locative. Two others, the vocative and the instrumental, maintained a lingering life. A special form for the vocative is found in the noun of the Gothic. The instrumental is occasionally but clearly seen in the singular of the noun and adjective in the Old High German and the Old Saxon, and in the demonstrative pronouns of all the early Teutonic tongues, save the Old Norse. It is likewise regarded by many as belonging to the Anglo- Saxon noun and adjective. But the remaining four cases are found in all the older languages of this branch, including, of course, Anglo-Saxon, and still survive in one of them, the New High German. 8. Number. — The primitive Indo-European had three numbers, — the singular, the dual, and the plural. In the Teutonic noun and adjective the dual had dis- appeared entirely. The Gothic retained it to some extent in the verb. In the personal pronouns of the first and second person, however, it is found in all the earlier languages of this branch, save that, in some of them, forms for certain cases are very rare, if not lack- ing entirely. 9. Declension. — There are two declensions of the Teutonic noun. They are termed respectively the vowel or strong, and the consonant or weak declension ; but in the older languages they underwent still further division. The vowel-declension was split up into three, according as one of the short vowels, — to which a Declension in the Primitive Teutonic. 199 was the corresponding feminine — or i or u, was the final of the formative syllable, or itself the formative syllable, added to the radical syllable to make the stem. The endings of the noun had been frequently so cut down, even in the earliest Teutonic tongues, that in the majority of cases there can be found in the nominative only a remnant of the additions originally made to the radical syllable. In Anglo-Saxon the abbreviation was carried still further, so that often nothing but the radi- cal syllable itself was left. Thus the word for ' fish ' is in Gothic fisks, in Old Norse fiskr, while in our early speech it is simply fisc. It is to be added that original o generally became a in the Teutonic tongues, and hence the ^-declension was for a long period com- monly called the ^-declension. 10. In each one of these subordinate declensions in 0, in /, and in u, the nouns had different inflections, according as they were of the masculine, the feminine, or the neuter gender. Consequently, in the primitive Teutonic, there were probably nine different inflections belonging to the vowel-declension. Still this system can nowhere be found, if it ever really existed, in its theoretical perfection. There is, for example, not a single neuter noun belonging to the /-declension in any one of the earliest Teutonic tongues ; and there are numerous other indications that this system was losing everywhere its complex character. In particu- lar in the Anglo-Saxon the declension in o had practi- cally absorbed the declension in //, the special termi- nations of the latter having been abandoned, and those 200 English Language. of the former having been substituted. There was, besides, but very little left of the /-declension, its words having largely gone over to the f-declension. ii. Again, of the primitive Indo-European conso- nant declensions, only the one in which the stem ended in -an was retained in the Teutonic. Accordingly the weak or consonant declension is sometimes called 'the ^-declension. This became a favorite declension in the Teutonic tongues, and existed in full vigor in all the early ones. In them it had inflections some- what distinct, according as the noun was masculine, feminine, or neuter, though these differences were far from being as marked as in the vowel declensions. 12. But though the ^-declension was the one consonant declension that really flourished in the early Teutonic languages, there still continued to sur- vive in them relics of other consonant declensions once of wide employment in the primitive tongue. Nor have they died out entirely in our present speech. To them belong nouns like man and tooth, which still exhibit vowel- modification in the plural ; others like month, and night, and cow, which, though they have come to be declined regularly, show traces of their ancient inflection in terms like ' twelvemonth,' ' fort- night,' and the dialectic ' kye ' ; and certain, having stems in -r or in -nd, such as nouns denoting the family relation like father and brother, or present participles used as nouns, such as were originally friend and fiend. These and others which could be mentioned are, however, so few in number comparatively that they are properly treated as anomalous. Declension in the Primitive Teutonic. 201 13. There is also a third declension, unlike either of the two just mentioned, which is found in pronouns and adjectives. Its peculiar characteristics will be seen further on. Besides these general features, com- mon to the inflection of the Teutonic noun, adjective, and pronoun, there were certain peculiarities con- nected with the changes in vowels or consonants that need to be described here, for they have been per- petuated through all periods of English. They are not confined, however, to any particular parts of speech. 14. One of these is the tendency in inflection of certain letters to pass into others. There were several instances of this nature in the early Teutonic tongues. For example, in the inflection of the Anglo-Saxon verb d not unfrequently passed into d, a result of which, though disguised, can still be observed in the preterite coi/{l)ng by nature, as in hus, ' house ' ; gear, ' year J ; deor, 'animal ' ; or long by position before two consonants, as in hors, 'horse'; ping, ' thing ' ; and folc, 'folk.' Naturally, therefore, these nouns, even after the break-up of Anglo-Saxon, would be apt to have their plurals of the same form as the singular. But during the old English period most of these neuters came gradually to conform to the declension of the Plural of Natter Nouns. 225 masculine nouns. They, in consequence, assumed -es in the plural. Occasionally some of them seem to have adopted -e, the weakened form of the -// final of the plural of neuter nouns of the same declension, whose vowel was short. This was not often the case, however, and is from its very nature attended with uncertainty. The nominative singular itself was fre- quently disposed to assume a final -e. It becomes, therefore, impossible to say whether -/, Irregular Plurals of the Noun. 231 fathom, mile, sail, score, stone, and tun — come from Anglo-Saxon nouns of other declensions. Furthermore, this practice was early extended to words from Romance sources. In Chaucer, for illustration, vers and cas mean ' verses ' and ' cases,' as well as ' verse ' and ' case.' We have, likewise, in Modern English a similar usage of Romance words, such as bushel, brace, couple, dozen, gross, and pair. With certain of these words, such as gross, in the sense of ' twelve dozen,' or sail, in the sense of ' vessel,' as ' fifty sail,' the regular form in -s is unusual and perhaps unknown. Names of a few animals and of several species of fish have no change of form in the plural occasionally, and in some in- stances invariably. In general, however, it may be said that the modern language shows an increasing preference for the plural in -s. But there continue to be many words, such as pair and pairs, score and scores, couple and couples, in which the frequency of the form either with or without -s varies with indi- vidual usage, or with the peculiar sense intended to be conveyed. 54. The second class includes a few nouns, which, in the English of the Anglo-Saxon period, invariably underwent vowel-modification (19) in the nominative and accusative plural, and have in some cases trans- mitted these modified forms to the English of our day. This was originally due, as has been explained, to the influence of a following vowel ; and, while the vowel once following has been dropped, the vowel-modifica- tion wrought by it remains. In the instances about 2 $2 English Language. to be cited, it was an i that has disappeared, which brought about the variation of o to e, of u to y, and of a to e. There were about a score of these nouns in Anglo-Saxon, of which the following eight survive in Modern English. In the list as here given the nomi- native singular and plural are placed side by side : — Singular. Plural. I Singular. Plural. broc, breeches, brec. fot, foot, fet. gos, goose, ges. toS, tooth, te5. cu, coxv, cy. lus, louse, lys. mus, mouse, mys. man, ma>i, men. That this modification of the vowel was not in itself a sign of the plural is at once made clear by the fact that, in Anglo-Saxon, the dative singular had invaria- bly in these words, and the genitive singular had oc- casionally, precisely the same form as the nominative plural. 55. Of the nouns just mentioned the form repre- senting broc, with the vowel o, does not seem to have been in use after the Conquest. Its place was taken, as early as the twelfth century, by birch, breech, from brec, and this in turn has been supplanted by the form with the plural ending -es. The original plural of cu was retained in the speech of the North, and is still found in the kye of the Scotch dialect. But another plural form, kine, had shown itself as early, certainly, as the beginning of the fourteenth century, and later ime established in the language of literature. Its origin will be indicated in the remarks upon the third Irregular Plurals of the Noun. 233 class (57). The remaining six, foot, goose, tooth, louse, mouse, and man, have remained unchanged, in respect to vowel-modification, during all the periods in the history of the language. Still, sporadic in- stances occur, in which the regular ending -s appears, with the vowel unmodified in the case of several of these words, giving, for example, such forms as foots, mouses, and mans. 56. In the third class are embraced the few nouns which still exhibit the ending in -;/, once common to half the substantives of the language. It has already been stated that, in the confusion that sprang up in the use of the vowel and consonant declensions, it was one of the inflections of the former that had triumphed over all the others. Of the nine words belonging to the original consonant declension that are used by Chaucer (43), three are likewise to be found with plurals in -s, clearly showing that the transition to the generally accepted form was going on. It continued to go on with unabated vigor after his death. By the beginning of the Modern English period, the only genuine historical plural in -11 that was used in prose and poetry was oxen. Even during the fourteenth century the form oxes is occasionally found. 1 Even, moreover, continued to be employed, but it was looked upon then, as now, merely as a poetic form. Of the vast number of nouns originally belonging to the con- sonant declension, ox is, therefore, the solitary survival 1 E.g. "Droves of axis and flockis of sheep." — Judith, ii. 3 ( Purvey 's Recension). 234 English Language. in Modern English, and even that, in the singular number, conforms to the vowel declension. It is to be added that hosen, which Chaucer used, dropped its -//, but did not add an -s. 57. At the same time, during this long conflict, the consonant declension did not fail to add some words to its numbers. In fact, in the Southern dialect, many nouns, as we have seen, belonging to the vowel declension, formed their plural in -n. The literary lan- guage of the Midland, however, in the latter half of the fourteenth century, had almost entirely discarded this termination ; though, as might be expected, there is a slight difference of usage in the writings of different authors. Taking Chaucer as the representative of this period, the following statement can be made in regard to these forms. There are six words, as employed by him, which still continue to show in the plural a final -n derived from the plural of the consonant inflection. Not one of these six, however, belonged to the two leading Anglo Saxon declensions. All of them exhib- ited irregularities in the earliest speech. Here will be given, side by side, the Anglo-Saxon form, the Old English intermediate form, and the Middle English form of the plural ; though there are numerous ortho- graphic variations of all of them, which will not be noticed here : — \n I ' .ixon. Old English. Middle English. lirotlire, ) ' rcthcren. l.ioNru, > brethrc. > brethrc, dohtru, dohtere, iloughtren. Irregular Plurals of the Noun. 235 Lnglo-Saxon. Old English. Middle English. sweostru, sustre, sustren. cildru, childre, children. fah, hostile, fon, fon. cy, or eye, kye, kyn. 58. Of these words daughter, sister, and foe exhibit in Chaucer's usage, if the manuscripts can be trusted, plurals both in -n and in -s. By the beginning of the Modern English period all, however, had assumed the latter termination. Each of the three other words has had a history of its own. The present strictly regular form brothers has been found in Layamon's " Brut " belonging to the Old English period, but it can scarcely be said to have come into use till the sixteenth century. Up to that time brethren was the form regularly em- ployed. In the century just mentioned brothers was revived, or again developed, and in the seventeenth century came to be preferred. The language still retains the two plurals, but ordinarily makes a slight distinction in their usage. 59. Child has even a more peculiar history. Its Anglo-Saxon original, did, had several ways of forming the plural, but cildru finally came to be the prevailing one. This assimilated the inflection of the word to that of a small class of Anglo-Saxon nouns, of which lamb, ealf, and egg are the modern representatives. These originally added r-u to form the plural, and in later English developed not only the regular plural in -es, but the plurals lambren, calveren, and eyren. In all 236 English Language. of these now disused forms the -n of the consonant declension has been added to the weakened original inflection. Child went through essentially the same process, developing in the North of England the plural childre, childer, and in the South adding to this form the ending -//. This early became, and has since remained, the standard form. The plurals which cu, ' cow,' de- veloped have been already given (55). It need only be added that it was apparently not until the seven- teenth century that the strictly regular form ' cows ' came into use. It is not found in Shakspeare, or in our version of the Bible. Kine even now continues to be employed, but as a general rule it belongs rather to the language of poetry than of prose. 60. There now remains the fourth class to be con- sidered, — that of the foreign nouns that have been imperfectly Anglicized, and still retain, in conse- quence, the plural they had in the tongue from which they were taken. Naturally the endings are very diverse. Most of these words have been introduced during the Modern English period ; many are terms connected with the natural or physical sciences. A large number of them are, therefore, technical in their character ; and of all of them it is true, that, at first, they are only employed by the educated. So long as their use was limited to this (lass, they underwent no change. The original plural, no matter what might be its ending, was rigidly retained. But no sooner did they cease to be purely technical than they were at Once iiiti ted by the tendency of the language to Irregular Plurals of the Noun. 237 strive after uniformity. With many of them, in conse- quence, the English plural in -s either superseded the foreign plural altogether, or became established along- side of it. It has been pointed out elsewhere how that, in obedience to this rule, omens has driven out the original plural omina, once in use, and dogmas has almost entirely taken the place of dogmata; while, on the other hand, formulae and formulas may be said to be equally common, though, in technical works, the former is perhaps preferred. 1 61. Here it is that the counteracting influence of the literary language makes itself felt. Were it not for this, it is fairly certain that the large majority of the foreign words that come to be generally employed would be fully Anglicized, and adopt the regular plural in -s. But in many cases the agency of the literary language makes the foreign plural perfectly familiar to all, and it becomes in time too well established to be discarded. In some kinds of words the difficulty of pronouncing what would be the Anglicized form tends to perpetuate the original one. This is familiarly seen in Latin nouns in -is whose plural ends in -es, such as ellipsis, ellipses ; hypothesis, hypotheses ; oasis, oases, and others ; or, in Latin nouns in -es, in which the plural is the same as the singular, like series and species. But there are other cases in which the for- eign form maintains itself without such aid. The plural genera, from genus, for example, is so firmly established that genuses, from present appearances, can have no hope of ever being adopted. 1 See page 147. 238 English Language. 62. It is natural, however, that, in many of these nouns, double forms should be produced, and indeed continue to increase as the words pass more and more from technical into common usage. The uneducated, or rather those not specially educated, cannot be expected to know the foreign plurals ; and the substi- tution of the English plural sign -s gets rid, by an easy process, of all doubts and difficulties. Consequently we have apparatus and apparatuses, radii and radi- uses, memoranda and memorandums, phenomena and phenomenons, vortices and vortexes, virtuosi and vir- tuosos, and numerous other double forms. In some cases there is a difference of meaning between these two plurals, as, for instance, between genii and geniuses, indices and indexes. In this respect the word stamen reverses the usual order of things ; for while, in science, the Anglicized plural stamens is the form employed, it is the foreign plural stamina that is heard in the language of common life. 63. It is clear that the use of foreign plurals is cer- tain, in some cases, to result in confusion. The great majority of men who speak English cannot be ex- pected to be familiar with any speech but their own ; and when endings are introduced of whose force they are ignorant, it is impossible that they should in every instance use them with exact propriety. Such termi- nations are in the nature of exceptions to a general rule, and the exceptions are but few which men will take the trouble to learn. It is too much to ask of those whose acquaintance with language is limited Foreign Plurals of the Noun. 239 only to their own, or even to the modern tongues, to be aware that stamina and effluvia and errata are plurals of the Latin nouns stamen, effluvium, and erratum. The fact, if known to them at all, must be learned in each particular instance. Under such circumstances, mistakes in usage are almost sure to arise. In the case of the words just mentioned, effluvia and errata have frequently been treated as singulars and have developed the plurals effluvias and erratas. These forms were not uncommon as far back as the seventeenth century, and have at times been used by writers of some repute. So at the pres- ent day the plural stamina is sometimes treated as a singular. 64. No better exemplification of the results of this confusion can be found than in the history of the two words cherub and seraph. Their respective plurals in the Hebrew, from which they were borrowed, were cherubim and seraphim ; and these forms naturally were the ones first used for that number, though with the ending -in instead of -im. At this point confu- sion came in. Cherubim and seraphim were not felt to be plurals. The result was, that they were treated as singulars ; and, being looked upon as singulars, they themselves, though really plurals, received the English plural sign -s in addition. Consequently the plurals with this termination came into wide use ; and this corruption was thoroughly established in the lan- guage before the Middle English period. How firmly fixed it had become is evident from the fact that 240 English Language. these are the only forms employed by the translators of the English Bible, though they were, of course, acquainted with the Hebrew. But in the sixteenth century the language also developed the regular Eng- lish forms cherubs and seraphs, which are the plurals now generally found. Still the fact remains that there have been and are in authorized usage two singular and three plural forms of these words, as may be illustrated by cherub and cherubim for the one, and cherubs, cherubim, and cherubims for the other. 65. Of these four classes of nouns, the plurals of which vary from the regular plural, this only remains to be said : whenever the genitive is employed, they assume an -s, after the manner of the ordinary inflec- tion. This, in a few instances, renders the genitive plural different from the nominative plural. In the case of the nouns which undergo vowel-modification, that variation causes necessarily the genitive plural to differ in form from the genitive singular, as man's, men's. These complete all the exceptions to the regular inflection that Modern English presents out- side of purely euphonic ones, such as the dropping of the sound of s, and sometimes of its sign, in the geni- tive of words which themselves terminate in the sound of s, as may be illustrated by such phrases as " for conscience' sake," and the like. CHAPTER III. THE ADJECTIVE. 66. The English noun, in the course of its history, has been largely stripped of its inflections ; but its losses bear little proportion to those of the adjective. To a certain extent, the same influences operated upon both. Together they underwent the changes that were brought about by the weakening of the vowels a, o, and it to e. Together they suffered from the dropping of the final -;/. The results, accordingly, which fol- lowed in the one case took place likewise in the other, and do not need to be repeated. But the losses of the adjective at even an early period were far more extensive than those of the noun, as the confusion of the declensions was also much greater. With this part of speech, inflection has now entirely disappeared. One unchanged form has taken the place of the mani- fold ones originally used to express, not merely the distinction of gender, number, and case, but also of declension. 67. During the Anglo-Saxon period the adjective was distinguished by the possession of the following characteristics : — 241 242 English Language. 1. Two declensions. 2. Forms differing, to a great extent, for the three genders, — the masculine, the feminine, and the neuter. 3. Two numbers, the singular and the plural, with marked differences of forms for each. 4. Four cases, — the nominative, genitive, dative, and accusative. To these most grammarians add a fifth, the instrumental, ending in - I blinde, / blindre, 1 blindum, ~i 1 blinde, 1 blindum, Ace. blindne, blinde, blind. blinde. 73. Definite (Nominal or Weak) Declension. SINGULAR. PLURAL. Masculine. Feminine. Neuter. All Genders. Nom. blinda, blinde, blinde, blindan, Gen . blindan, blindan, blindan, blindra, Dat. blindan, blindan, blindan, blindum, Ace, blindan. blindan, blinde. blindan. Loss of the Adjective Inflection. 245 For the usual termination -ra of the genitive plural, -ena sometimes occurs. This, when employed, makes the definite declension conform entirely to that of the noun. 74. As an illustration of the use of these declensions, ' a blind man ' would be, in Anglo-Saxon, blind man ; ' of a blind man ' would be blindes marines ; whereas, making the substantive definite by connecting it with the demonstrative pronoun, 'that (or 'the') blind man' would be se blinda man; and 'of that (or 'the') blind man ' would be fias blindan mannes. 75. A glance at these paradigms is sufficient to show how rich in inflection the English adjective was in the Anglo-Saxon of the tenth and eleventh cen- turies, even if then it had lost some of the endings which two centuries before had belonged to it. Down to the twelfth century this fulness of inflection was on J the whole retained. The same confusion, however, that overtook the noun during the centuries following the Conquest befell the adjective also. Variation of inflection was one of the first things to go. By the end of the second century after the Conquest the distinc- tion between the definite and the indefinite adjective had not only broken down to a great extent every- where, it had in some places disappeared entirely. The confusion in this part of speech that sprang up in consequence did not, however, result in giving exclusive ascendency to any one particular inflection, as in the case of the noun : it had rather the effect of causing the terminations to be abandoned altogether. 246 Engl is Ji Language . 76. Traces of the two original declensions con- tinued to exist, it is true, till late in the fourteenth century, and possibly till the middle of the next. Monosyllabic adjectives ending in a consonant as- sumed then, as before, a final -e in the singular when preceded by the definite article or a demonstrative or possessive pronoun. Thus, ' the blind man ' would be generally written and pronounced the blinde man. This was occasionally true also of adjectives of more than one syllable. But after that period all trace of distinctions of this sort speedily disappeared, and dis- appeared completely. A relic of the definite declen- sion may perhaps still be seen in the form olden (A. S., ealdan) in phrases such as 'the olden time'; but if olden in such an expression actually took its origin from that source, it is, to modern feeling, simply a collateral form of the adjective old, and not an oblique case of it, as etymologically it is. 77. The only further important survival of the original inflection at the beginning of the Middle English period was the distinction that still continued to prevail between the singular and the plural. Mono- syllabic adjectives ending in a consonant assumed -e as the termination of the latter number. Thus, for illustration, blind would be used for all cases of the singular, when not compelled to conform to the defi- nite declension. Similarly blinde would be the common form for all cases of the plural. Necessarily this dis- tinction could not apply to adjectives which ended in -e, such as netae, swete, blithe; it had even then Comparison of tlie Adjective. 247 ceased to apply to adjectives of more than one sylla- ble. It was, moreover, further weakened by the fact that many adjectives which originally terminated in a consonant had, like the noun, assumed a final -e to which they were not entitled ; and, in consequence, the ending of the singular was with them the same as that of the plural. By the close of the Middle English period the distinction between the two numbers was 1/ utterly swept away, and the unchanged radical form of the adjective was, as now, the only one employed. 78. The history of the participle does not differ from that of the adjective. It also was generally inflected both ways in Anglo-Saxon, and shared throughout in all the losses suffered by the latter. Comparison. 79. Comparison, being really a matter of derivation, and not of inflection, does not strictly find a place in a history of the latter. It is convenient, however, to follow the usual method, and so treat it. In all of the Indo-European tongues certain suffixes were added to the radical of the adjective to form the comparative : to form the superlative, a secondary suffix was added, usually to the suffix of the com- parative. These suffixes underwent much change of form in the various languages ; but their general resemblance and common descent are apparent in all. The suffixes almost universally employed in the Teutonic to form the comparative were is and os: to 248 English Language. s. these another suffix, ta, was added to form the super- lative. But in every one of the Teutonic tongues, save the Gothic, the s of the comparative had suffered rhotacism (14), as it did usually in Latin (cf. alt-us, alt-ior, alt-ius). The forms employed were, in con- sequence, ir and or. In the superlative, however, the change of s to r did not take place ; and the original forms of the suffixes were therefore ista and osta. 80. In Anglo-Saxon, moreover, the i or of the suffix was dropped in the comparative. In some words, however, vowel-modification produced by the i (20) continued to remain, and, in a few instances, transmitted the modified form to a later period. Thus tang, ' long,' strung, ' strong,' under the influence of the vowel which had come to be dropped, became lengra (for lengira) and strengra (for strengira) . In a similar manner, geong, 'young,' became, in the com- parative, gingra, and eald, ' old,' became likewise ieldra. The vowels i and of the suffixes being dropped, the simple letter r was consequently all that was added to form the comparative ; and, as adjec- tives in this degree were invariably inflected accord- ing to the definite declension, the termination of the nominative was therefore always -ra and -re. In the superlative, the final -a of the two original suffixes, ista and osta, was dropped, and the i of the ending 1st was usually weakened into e. Still, whenever in- flected according to the definite declension, which was usually the case, it necessarily reassumed the final ■a, wherever that termination properly belonged. Comparison of the Adjective. 249 81. The comparison of the adjective in the Anglo- Saxon period may, in consequence, be fully seen in the following examples : — blind, blind, blind-r-a, blind-ost. brad, broad, brad-r-a, brad-ost. heard, hard, heard-r-a, heard-ost. Strang, strong, streng-r-a, streng-est. eald, old, ield-r-a, ield-est. geong, young, gieng-r-a, gieng-est. 82. In the Early English period the comparative suffix was no longer added directly to the stem as in Anglo-Saxon, but an e or an was inserted between. This may have been due to a transference to the com- parative of the e and o of the superlative endings. Confusion, at any rate, soon sprang up in the use of these two vowels. The same adjective would appear in the comparative and superlative degree, sometimes with the suffixes -ore, -ost, sometimes with -ere, -est. A representative comparison of the adjective during this transition period would be the following : — ( blind-ere, blind-est(e). blind, \ t blind-ore, blind ost(e). The forms with the connective e became steadily predominant, and by the fourteenth century were almost invariably employed. The final -e, both of the comparative and of the superlative, was also at that time frequently dropped in spelling, as it had been 250 English Language. in pronunciation. By the beginning of the Modern English period it had disappeared altogether, leaving the comparison precisely in the situation in which it is at present. 83. The modification of the vowel seen in Strang, 'strong,' strengra, 'stronger'; /ang, 'long,' lengra, 'longer' ; geong, ' young,' gingra, 'younger,' and other words lasted down to the fourteenth century, and later. We find then, in consequence, such com- parisons as long, lenger(e), lengest(e). strong, strenger(e), strengest(e) yong, yenger(e), yengest(c). This is the common method, at the beginning of the Middle English period, of comparing long and strong; but in the case of yong, ' young,' the vowel of the positive had a good while before been adopted into the comparative and superlative. In the fifteenth century this same procedure took place in the com- parison of the other two. The forms with vowel-modi- fication disappeared from the language entirely, with the single exception of old, which still clings to elder and eldest, the representatives of the original com- parison, although it has developed, and commonly uses, the more strictly regular forms, older and oldest. 84. In the Ancren Riwle, or 'Rule of Anchorites,' a work written about 1220, one of the first, if not the first, recorded instance of comparison by means of adverbs is found in the phrase the meste dredful. This Double Comparison. 251 comparison by means of the adverbs more and most is rare in the thirteenth century ; but in the fourteenth it made rapid progress. Since that time it has steadily increased in use, nourishing side by side with the suffixes in -er and -est. In the case of polysyllabic adjectives this method of comparison is now much the more common one, few late English writers em- ploying forms like Bacon's honorablest, Shakspeare's sovereignest, or Milton's virtuousest, exquisitest, exeel- lentest. But the tendency to give up the employment of such formations is not due to their being improper, but to their being difficult to pronounce. 85. The existence of two methods of comparison enabled English to gratify that disposition to make use of double comparison to which all the Teutonic tongues have manifested an inclination. This was introduced in the fourteenth century, and for the next three centuries was largely employed. In the latter part of the sixteenth century, and the beginning of the seventeenth, when it was by many regarded as an elegancy of style, it was perhaps the most prevalent. Expressions like ' the most unkindest cut of all ' ("Julius Caesar," act iii. scene 2), 'the most straitest sect of our religion' (Acts xxvi. 5), 'my most dearest nephew' (Sir Thomas More's "Edward V."), are to be found scattered through the pages of numerous writers of the Elizabethan age, and earlier. By Ben Jonson this is spoken of as " a certain kind of English Atticism, or eloquent phrase of speech, imitating the manner of the most ancientest and finest Grecians, 252 English Language. who, for more emphasis and vehemency's sake, used so to speak." This usage died out in the seventeenth century, but has been occasionally employed by Eng- lish poets of the present time. 1 86. Furthermore, the assertion, so frequently made, that adjectives expressing the highest possible degree of a quality, like chief, supreme, perfect, are not subject to comparison, whether logically correct or not, is not merely utterly at variance with the usage of the best writers of all periods of English, but with that of the best writers of both ancient and modern cultivated tongues. For instance, more perfect and most perfect have been employed by the greatest authors of our language with as much freedom as per- fectior and perfectissimus were by Cicero. A similar statement can be made as to the use of the superlatives when two persons or things only are compared. The impropriety of this usage is strongly insisted upon by many grammarians ; yet it is one which will be met with constantly in the best writers of our speech. 87. Like all the Teutonic tongues, English possessed certain adjectives, the comparison of which is irregu- lar. The irregularity consists in the fact that the comparative and superlative are derived from a stem different from that of the positive. In Anglo-Saxon the following were the forms in common use : — 1 E.g., Rise up, shine, stretch thine hand out, with thy bow Touch the most dimmest heights of trembling heaven. SWINBURNE, Atalanta in Cafydon, line 20. Irregular Comparison of the Adjective. 253 god good, betera, betest. yfel, evil, wiersa, t wierrest, I wierst. micel, muck, mara, miest. lytel, little, lSssa, < liesest, 1 laest. These forms have continued with little change down to our time, though ill and bad have come into use as additional positives of worse. In this last word and in less, as will be observed, the change of s to r in the comparative (79) did not take place. 88. There has at times been prevalent a disposition to compare some of these words regularly, but it has never been sufficiently powerful to cause any general adoption of such new forms. Gooder and goodest, badder and baddest, are, however, to be met with occasionally in our literature, though they cannot be called common ; and littler and littlest are forms fre- quently found in the English dialects, and sometimes make their appearance in the literary speech. Further- more, the double comparative lesser has thoroughly established itself in good usage, though it does not seem to have come into the language till the sixteenth century. Worse/; another double comparative, very common in the Elizabethan period, is now but rarely employed : still, the frequency of its occurrence in certain great writers, especially Shakspeare, will prob- ably prevent its ever dying out completely. 89. A few adjectives still preserved, at the begin- 254 English Language. ning of the Middle English period, the practice of adding the suffixes of comparison without any con- nective, as in Anglo-Saxon. Thus we have the form derre, ' dearer.' The comparative and superlative of the adjective now spelled high was then frequently herre and hext. There are, moreover, other cases in which a positive was originally lacking. Such are nerre, ' nearer,' and next, ' nearest.' These were formed in Anglo-Saxon from the adverb neah, as was further (A. S. fur&ra), from the adverb fore, ' be- fore.' In this case -titer, another suffix of comparison unusual in Anglo-Saxon, was added to the stem. Later, these forms further and furthest seem to have supplanted the ferre and ferrest derived from the adverb feor, ' far,' and were assumed to belong to that word as their positive. As a natural result came still later the additional form farther and farthest, in which the vowel of the assumed positive has made its way into the comparative and superlative. No distinction in good usage exists as yet between the forms farther and further, though one may be developed in time. 90. There is still another suffix of comparison in Anglo-Saxon which has left some trace of itself in Modern English. This is the superlative suffix -ma, which is found frequently in Latin in the form -mo, as, for example, mini mo. In Anglo-Saxon it is seen in for- ma, 'foremost,' 'first,' and hinde-ma, 'hind- most.' But even then the superlative force of the suffix -ma began to be felt as weak, and the regular suffix -est was added, thereby forming the double Irregular Comparison of tJic Adjective. 255 superlative suffix -mest, seen in fyrmest. This double superlative suffix was found in a number of words in Anglo-Saxon, which came usually from adverbs and prepositions, such, for example, as innemest, ' in- most ' ; mid mest, 'midmost'; and nordmest, 'north- most.' It still occurs in several words in Modern English, but it has now assumed universally the form -most, the having been substituted for e as a conse- quence of -mest being confounded with the adverb most, used similarly to express the superlative. CHAPTER IV. THE PRONOUN. 91. The pronoun is strictly divided into four classes, — the personal, the demonstrative, the interrogative, and the relative. To these is added usually a fifth class, called the indefinite, which comprehends a num- ber of words that occupy a position half way between the noun and adjective, and sometimes partake of the nature of both. Names of other classes are also met with frequently. The most common of these are the so-called possessive pronouns, which are in reality nothing but adjectives ; the reflexive pronouns, which consist simply of the personal pronouns strengthened by the word self; and the reciprocal pronouns, which are formed by the combination of two of the in- definite pronouns. It is only the first five classes, however, that can be said to have an independent existence. 92. As the indefinite pronouns were inflected either like the noun or the adjective, their later history is involved in that of those two parts of speech, and does not demand attention here. It is different with 256 The Demonstrative Pronouns. 257 the words belonging to the four other classes. These have a history of a somewhat exceptional character. Ordinarily the discussion of the pronoun begins with the personal ; but as, in the later development of the English language, some of the forms of the demonstra- tive have gone over to the personal, it is expedient in this case to begin with the former. The Demonstrative Pronouns. 93. The only two genuine demonstratives in Mod- ern English are that and this with their respective plurals. But in the earliest period of the language they had a fulness of inflection of which there has been but little survival in the present tongue. Each of them will require separate consideration. 94. The following is the inflection in Anglo-Saxon of the demonstrative represented in Modern English by that : — SINGULAR. PLURAL. Masc. Fern. Neut. All Genders Nom. se, ' seo, Het, pa, Gen. paes, Here, paes, para, Dai. Hem, Here, )>cem, Hem, Ace. hone, pa, Het, pa. Inst. py. r Besides the forms just given, there are numerous varying ones which it is not necessary to specify here. 95. From the beginning the form f>e had been found in the dialect of the North alongside of se. It 258 English Language. also appeared in late West-Saxon ; and early in Old English the form for the nominative became pe, peo, pat. The inflection at that time, however, began to fall into confusion. There came to be, as was gener- ally the case with all parts of speech, the widest dif- ference of usage between various portions of the country. It resulted in the gradual confounding and consequent abandonment of the inflectional forms of the pronoun se. This went on increasing, so that at the beginning of the Middle English period nothing was left of the singular number but that, originally the neuter nominative and accusative. The plural was represented by tho, the Anglo-Saxon /hi. All the other forms had either disappeared or had been put to other uses. Nor was tho itself the only plural. The form thos, or those, probably from the plural pas of the demonstrative pronoun pes (99), had taken a place alongside of it in the same sense. At first it was used interchangeably with it, but finally supplanted it entirely as the regular plural of that. On the other hand, the Early English representatives of the original plural of this pronoun did not die out. Modified as to their spelling by the corresponding forms of the similar pronoun of the Old Norse, they went over to the pronoun of the third person, and were finally adopted as its plural (108). 96. The instrumental py, which in the North had also the form pe, continued, however, to remain in use with the comparative of the adjective. With this it is still constantly employed in Modern English, as it The Demonstrative Pronouns. 259 in fact has been during every period in the history of the tongue. In such phrases as " the more, the better," the is often falsely explained as an article ; whereas it, in fact, is nothing more than a relic of the lost instrumental case of the demonstrative pronoun. 97. It is evident that the definite article owes its origin to the demonstrative just inflected. As such, in fact, this pronoun was generally employed during the Anglo-Saxon period, though many cases occur when it is hard to decide whether the word is really used as the article or as the demonstrative. In the twelfth century the form se had generally given way to the collateral form foe, which, as time went on, came more and more to take the place of all the other inflectional forms. This had become the established rule in the fourteenth century, in which the, strictly a nominative singular masculine, was employed with all nouns with- out respect to their gender, number, or case. Before that time, forms derived from other cases of the de- monstrative are occasionally to be found, especially in the Southern dialect. This is particularly true of foe 11 or then, from the accusative foone, an example of which can be seen in the following line : — Then vvey he nom to Londone, he and alle his. 1 98. But besides the forms which have died out of the language entirely, that was employed to some ex- tent also as a definite article. Though itself strictly a 1 He took the way to London, he and all his. — Robert of Glou- cester, vol. i., page 364. 260 English Language. neuter nominative or accusative, it was applied to any noun in the singular number, no matter what its gen- der or case. This state of things did not continue. The employment of that as a demonstrative, as a rel- ative, and also as a conjunction, had insensibly the tendency to cause the to be regarded as exclusively the article, not only for the sake of greater definite- ness, but to relieve the other word from being too much over-worked. So, during the Middle English period, that gave way entirely to the. Certain expres- sions in which it had once been used as an article con- tinued, however, to survive long after any such general employment of it had been abandoned. This is true especially of the phrases that oon, and that other, mean- ing -the one,' and ' the other.' In these the a of that having been weakened to e, the final t of the resulting thet was often transferred to the following word, giving us the tone, and the tother, sometimes that tother, — expressions which are not uncommon in Elizabethan English, and, indeed, are occasionally met with now. In fact, the word tother has often been used alone. When now so used, it is generally written with an apostrophe, father, as if the / were a contraction of the, instead of being in its origin the final letter of thet. 99. The following is the paradigm of the Anglo- Saxon demonstrative pronoun whose representative in Modern English is this: — The Demonstrative Pronouns. 261 SINGULAR. PLURAL. Masc. Fem. Neut. All Genders, Nom. pes, peos, pis, has, Gen. pises, Hsse, pises, pissa, Dot. pisum, pisse, pisum, pisum, Ace. Hsne, has, pis, pas. Inst. hys. As in the case of se, there are numerous variant forms not recorded here. 100. Even less of this pronoun has survived than of the pronoun se. It is the neuter nominative and ac- cusative that has alone remained of the singular ; and the dropping of the other forms not only took place early, but had been completed by the close of the thirteenth century, though sporadic examples of some of them occur later. In the fourteenth century, only the form this is found in the singular. The original plural foas had become confounded with the plural of se, and gradually ceased to be regarded as belonging to this demonstrative (95 ). Its place as plural was taken by the surviving singular form this, to which -e, the plural ending of the adjective, was sometimes added, giving the form thise. A collateral form was these, which gradually supplanted the two others, and became, in the Middle English period, the regular plural, which it has ever since remained. The form this, however, continued to survive, and, as a genuine plural, is far from uncommon in the sixteenth century. Especially is this true of certain expressions such as " this twenty 262 English Language. weeks," " this hundred pounds," which are still more or less in use, and are now ordinarily explained on syntactical grounds, which do not require this to be regarded as a plural. Such it certainly was not in the original form of the phrases. 1 101. Besides this, there were in Anglo-Saxon cer- tain other words which are frequently reckoned as demonstrative pronouns. They are compounds of lie, ' like.' One of them is He, ' same,' which lasted down to the fifteenth century in the literary language as ill:, and then passed out of common use ; but it was pre- served in the speech of the North, and is made some- what familiar to us by its frequent occurrence in the poetry written in the Scotch dialect. Another of these demonstratives was />ylc, ' that same,' ' that,' which in Early English usually appeared as thilke, but died out before the beginning of Modern English. Another compound was swile, which, after passing through many intermediate forms of spelling, varying with pronuncia- tion, — among which are swile lie, swulche, sitlehe, szviclie, siehe, and soehe, — finally had one of them, such, adopted into the language of literature as the established form. The vulgar speech still preserves the spelling and pronunciation sieli, corresponding strictly to the correlative which (136). 102. Of these four, He followed the definite declen- sion of the adjective in Anglo Saxon ; the other two, the indefinite ; and they all naturally shared in the 1 Compare, e.g., pis feowertig daga ( Blickling Homilies, page 35), in which daga is the genitive plural. The Personal Pronouns. 263 fate that overtook those inflections. Besides these, there was originally in the language a third genuine demonstrative, geon, corresponding to the German jener. But even in the Anglo-Saxon period it was be- coming obsolete, only one instance of its use having been so far recorded. In the form yon, however, it was preserved in the Northern dialect, and has ex- tended from that to the language of literature ; but it is rarely used outside of poetry. The Personal Pronouns. 103. The following are the forms of the pronouns of the first, second, and third persons, as found in Anglo-Saxon. The third person is the only one that distinguishes gender, and that in the singular alone. FIRST PERSON. Singular. Dual. Plural. Norn. ic, Wit, we, Gen. mill, uncer, user, ure, Dat. me, unc, us, Ace. t mec, I me. SECONE uncit, unc. 1 PERSON. usic, us. Singular. Dual. Plural. Nom. K git, ge, Gen. Inn, incer, eower, Dat. \>e, inc, eow, Ace. t J'ec, tj>e. incit, inc. eowic, eow. 264 English Language. THIRD PERSON. SINGULAR. PLURAL. Masculine. Feminine. Neuter. All Genders. Nom. he, heo, hit, hi, Gen. his, hire, his, hira, Dat. him, hire, him, him, Ace. hine. < } hit. hi. I heo. i Here, as in the case of the other pronouns, numer- ous variant forms are not recorded. 104. Comparing these forms with those found in Modern English, it is evident at once that the personal pronouns have retained more of the original inflec- tion than either the noun or the adjective. It is they and the interrogative who that alone continue to make a distinction in form between the nominative and objective cases. Moreover, whatever losses they suf- fered, they suffered them before the Middle English period ; and certain general statements can be made in regard to their forms as seen in Anglo-Saxon, con- trasted with those exhibited by them even in Middle English. 105. The most noticeable thing is the fact that, in this, the earliest form of the language, the pronouns of the first and second persons still continued to re- tain the dual number. It had died out of the noun, the adjective, and the verb ; but in Anglo-Saxon, as in the other early Teutonic tongues, it still survived in these two pronouns. But in it, as likewise in the others, The Personal Pronouns. 265 it showed signs of giving way. Even in the ninth and tenth centuries it was not unusual to strengthen the dual forms by one of the words meaning ' both ' or ' two.' The nominative dual wit, meaning ' we two,' received not unfrequently the word begen or bu, ' both,' as in the following line : — Ne forlaete ic ] e, J'enden wit lifia'8 bu} Oedmon, Genesis, line 2256. Instances also occur in which bu, ' both,' and twa or tic, ' two,' are together added to the form of the dual. As the number was by no means essential to expression, its fate was sealed as soon as the force originally beLmging to it was felt to be going. It sur- vived the Norman Conquest some two hundred years ; but it was never in any sense common. In the thir- teenth century it disappeared entirely. 106. The second fact to be noticed is, that the feminine nominative singular of the third person, and all the forms of the plural, have been entirely sup- planted by the corresponding forms of the demon- strative pronoun se, seo, ficet (94). This transition began to take place during the Old English period, but was not fully completed till the fifteenth century. It doubtless owed its origin to the desire of distin- guishing between the forms of the pronoun, which had frequently come to be the same for different genders, cases, and numbers. The form he, for example, sometimes represents in Early English the modern 1 I shall not desert thee while we two both live. 266 English Language. masculine he, the feminine she, and the plural they; and likewise him or hem stands for the modern mas- culine him, the neuter it, and the plural them. 107. The resort to the demonstrative was not un- natural. In the case of the feminine pronouns it began to manifest itself in the twelfth century. A number of forms based upon sea, 'that one' (94) early took their places alongside of heo, though it is not impassible that they were influenced to some extent by the latter. Among them were scheo, scJia, sco, sc/ie, and she, the last of which prevailed over all others, and in the fifteenth century became the standard form. As usual, in all these movements the Northern dialect led the way ; but in every case the triumph of the newer forms was a very slow one. 108. This is especially true of the substitution of the plural forms of the demonstrative, />a, para, and /'am for the original plural of the third person. As a result, two sets of forms for this number existed side by side for a long period, hi, here, and hem in the South, thei, /heir, and them in the North. In the lit- erary language of the Midland during the fourteenth century there was a temporary compromise between these rival inflections. Thei or they appears in the nominative plural, here and hem in the oblique cases. This is the regular declension in Chaucer. In the fifteenth century, however, here and hem were univer- sally displaced in the literary speech by their a.nd them. It is to be added that the forms which these words as- sumed in English were largely influenced by the cor- The Personal Pronouns. 267 responding Old Norse forms, foeir, heirra, f>eim, that tongue having profoundly affected the Northern dialect in which this new plural first appeared. Furthermore, the old objective hem has left a relic of itself in modern speech in the contraction 'em, which, in books printed in the first part of the seventeenth century, often appears as 'hem, as if it had been contracted from tJiem, and were not itself the original form. 109. The third point to be marked is that- the original Anglo-Saxon accusative has disappeared, and the modern objective case is derived, not from it, but from the dative ; that is to say, me comes from the dative vie, and not the accusative mec; him, from him, and not from June ; her, from hire, and not from /// or Keo. The only exception to this rule is to be found in the neuter pronoun of the third person. In this the modern form it has been derived from the accusa- tive, and not the dative. Yet how universal was the preference for the latter case is made cle?r by the fact that, when the plural of the demonstrative se was introduced into the pronoun of the third person, it was the dative /nem, ' them,' and not the accusative ha, that was adopted for the objective. no. This disuse of the accusative began early. 1/ Even in Anglo-Saxon the strengthened forms mec, hec, usie, and lowic, were largely discarded for me, fie, us, and eorv, which were the same as the dative ; and the former died out immediately after the Conquest, if, indeed, they can be said to be existing at the time of it. The accusatives of the third person lasted longer ; " 268 English Language. but by the end of the twelfth century they were some- times supplanted by the dative, and, by the end of the thirteenth, they had almost universally been aban- doned. In the neuter pronoun the dative form him and the accusative hit or it were both for a long period in use : indeed, instances of the former occur late in the sixteenth century. But much before that time, under the increasing tendency to regard him as belong- ing exclusively to the masculine, the use of it for the neuter became general ; and for the sake of distinc- tion, this accusative was adopted in Modern English as the form for the new objective case. in. Besides these general statements, certain special changes are to be noted in the form of the pronouns. In the first person ic passed in Southern English into the form ich; in Northern English into the form ik. From both of these words the final con- sonant or consonants occasionally fell away, leaving nothing but the vowel. This did not take place often in very Early English, but it occurred in both dialects, though perhaps more commonly in that of the North. Still in all regions of the country, the full and the shortened forms were used interchangeably, ich and / or ik and /, being found in the same work and some- times in the same sentence. The practice increased of using the simple vowel alone, especially in the country north of the Thames. In the fourteenth cen- tury it had become almost universally adopted in the language of literature. For a long while it was lerally written with a small letter, as it is now by The Personal Pronouns. 269 the uneducated ; but before the beginning of the Modern English period, it was regularly designated by a capital. 112. In the first part of the Early English period the genitives of the first and second personal pronouns often dropped their final -//, and accordingly exhibited the double forms min and mi, thin and thi. The neuter hit came at the same time under the influence of a tendency which has been very powerful in all periods of the language, and dropped its initial h. Still both it and hit flourished side by side for several hundred years ; and while, after the fourteenth cen- tury, the former became more common, the latter did not die out entirely till the sixteenth. A form ha or a, used for several pronouns, and among them he, made its appearance at the beginning of the Early English period. Though still found in the provincial dialects, it is only of importance here from the fact that it is constantly employed by the Elizabethan dramatists, and put into the mouths of the highest as well as the lowest characters. A relic of it is preserved in the interjection quotha, that is, ' quoth he.' 113. At the beginning of the Middle English period the following paradigms of the personal pronouns exemplify the usage of Chaucer, its representative author. In all cases where varying forms in equally common use exist, — and there are numbers of such, — those most closely resembling Modern English have been selected. 270 E/iglis/i Language. FIRST PERSON. SECOND PERSON. Singular. Plural. Singular. Plural. Nom. I, we, thou, ye, f min, 1 | thin, 1 (jt-ii. < V oure, < y youre, I mi, > Ithi, > Objec. me. us. thee. you. THIRD PERSON. SINGULAR. PLURAL. Masculine. Feminine. Neuter. All Genders. Nom. he, she, Ci they, Gen. his, hire, his, here, Objec. him. hire. hem. 114. That the Middle English personal pronoun is about the same as the Modern English, save in certain forms of the third person, is evident at a glance. Their and them took the place of here and hem in the fifteenth century, as has been stated. Up to the seven- teenth century, however, his remained as the genitive of both the neuter and the masculine, just as the dative for both had at one time been him. But by the end of the fifteenth century the // had been generally dis- carded from hit. In consequence, his did not seem so properly the genitive of it as it did of he. As the disposition grew in strength to regard his as belonging lusively to the latter, various methods were resorted The Personal Pronouns. 271 to in order to avoid employing it as a neuter. One of the first of these was to use it, without any in- flection, as a genitive ; and this occurs certainly as early as the fourteenth century, and was common during the fifteenth and sixteenth. The creation and gradual adoption of the form its has already been told, and need not be here repeated. 1 Before the Restoration of the Stuarts, in 1660, it had become firmly estab- lished in the language ; and, by the end of the seven- teenth century, most men, doubtless, supposed it had always been in existence. Milton is the principal writer of .the middle of the seventeenth century who exhibits any reluctance in using it. As is well known, it is found but three times in his poetry, and then only where it is almost essential to clearness. It, however, was sometimes used by him in his prose. 2 115. One thing to be especially marked in the para- digms given of the Middle English personal pronouns is, that there is no confusion between the nominative and objective. In Chaucer's writings ye and you, for example, are never confounded. The former is invariably the case of the subject ; the latter, the case of the object. Occasional instances of confusion between the two cases have been discovered in writings of the fourteenth century ; but they are so few in number, that it is more reasonable to attribute the great majority of them to blunders by the copyists rather than to intention on the part of the author. Undoubtedly the resemblance in writing, already 1 Pages 165-167. 2 E.g., Areopagitica, Arbei's reprint, page 71. 272 English Language. pointed out, 1 between the letters y and the Rune /> contributed largely to the confusion of the two forms, so that f>ou was frequently indistinguishable from you; at any rate, it was not distinguished from it. As a result, you was supposed to be meant when thou was intended. As is inevitable in such cases, what was originally a blunder came soon to be accepted as an au- thorized form. Besides this, there were other agencies at work to break down the distinction between the nominative ye and the objective you. In the fifteenth century this result had come to pass to a considerable extent. Still it was not till after the middle of the sixteenth century that the confusion between the two forms showed itself on any large scale. Nor did it then completely. Our version of the Bible, for in- stance, has regularly ye in the nominative and you in the accusative : but in this particular it is more archaic than is the language of the period to which it nominally belongs. 116. With the plural of the second person this con- fusion of cases has become permanently established in the language. You, the representative of the original dative and accusative, is now the regular form for both nominative and objective. Ye is also still used, but likewise indifferently in the two cases, and with comparative infrcquency in either. After the middle of the sixteenth century, it looked for a time as if it were possible that a similar result might be reached in the case of all the personal pronouns. 1 See pages 34-35. The Personal Pronouns. 273 The distinction between nominative and objective was showing everywhere symptoms of breaking down. In fact, if the language of the Elizabethan drama represents fairly the language of society, — and we can hardly take any other view, — great license in this respect had begun to prevail. Me, thee, us, you, him, her, and them were frequently treated as nomi- natives ; while the corresponding nominative forms were treated as objectives. Modernized editions of the authors of that period do not in this respect rep- resent justly the usage of the time, as in all or nearly all of them changes in the text are silently made. But, with the exception of ye and you, this confusion of case did not become universally accepted. The original distinction gradually reasserted itself, and is now perhaps more strongly insisted upon, at least by grammarians, than at any period since the six- teenth century. Yet the popular, and to some extent, the literary speech has preserved expressions which still show this disregard of strict inflection. One of these is the frequent use of the objective case after than and as. But it is more particularly noticeable where the pronoun / is the second of two pronouns that are governed by a preposition or a verb. One of these colloquial phrases, bettveen you and I, has been exceedingly common from the time of Queen Elizabeth, and can be found in the writings of many well-known authors in our speech. 117. Certain other phrases, such as, it is me, it is him, it is her, are much oftener heard at the present 274 English Language. day than the foregoing. They are perhaps more com- mon than during the Elizabethan period. The wider extension of their use may possibly be due to an imi- tation, conscious or unconscious, of French expres- sions like c'est moi ; at any rate, they were very frequent in the eighteenth century, when the influence of the French language on our own was most decided. The expressions, condemned as they almost invariably are by grammarians, have on their side the authority of many of the most eminent writers of our tongue. 1 1 Out of scores and scores of instances of the various locutions mentioned that could be quoted, I give here a few examples, citing most of them from authors of the Elizabethan period, educated at the universities. Accordingly, but one has been taken from Shak- speare, who would furnish a large number: — What difference is between the duke and I? Webster, White Devil, page 37 (Ed. of 1861). Nor earth nor heaver shall part my love and /. Greene, James IV., act i. sc. 1. Malvolio. Besides, you waste She treasure of your time with a foolish knight. Aguecheck. That's me, I warrant you. Siiakspeare, Twelfth Night, act ii. sc. 5. Let it be me. GREENE, Bacon and Bungay, page 170 (Ed. of 1861). Nor thee nor them, thrice-noble Tamburlaine, Shall want my heart to be with gladness pierced To do you honor and security. MARLOWE, Tamburlaine I., act i. sc. 2. O wretched Abigail, what hast thee done ? MARLOWE, Jew of Malta, act ii. sc. 4. Be thee vicegerent of his royalty. GREENE and LODGE, Looking-Glass for London, page 118 (Ed. of 1861). The Personal Pronouns. 275 It is to be added that the expressions, •'/ is /, it is he, and the similar ones, are not usual before the fifteenth century, if they exist at all before that time. The form in Anglo-Saxon was, Ic eom hit, ' I am it.' In Old English this usually appeared as, / it am. Later it is found in Chaucer as, it am I. 118. It has already been remarked that the Anglo- Saxon genitives niin and fnn frequently dropped the -n in the Old English period. Precisely corresponding in form to these genitives were the adjective pronouns nun and pin, which had originally a full set of inflec- tions, according to the indefinite declension. These For Amurnth's stout stomach shall undo Both he himself and all his other crew. Greene, Alphousus, act v. page 245 (Ed. of 1861). What would you with the king ? Is it him you seek ? Marlowe, Edward II., act ii. sc. 5. Tis not thy wealth, but her that I esteem. MARLOWE, Jetv of Malta, act ii. sc. 4. 'Tis her I so admire. Fletcher, Faithful Shepherdess, act i. sc. 3. Thyself and them shall never part from me Before I crown you kings in Asia. Marlowe, Tamburlaine /., act i. sc. 2. It was not me you followed last night to my lodging from the Park. — Wvcherley, Love in a Wood, act v. sc. 5. I may be pretty well assured it is not me. Addison, Drummer, act ii. sc. r. It is evident, then, that if Atossa was the first inventress of epis- tles, these that carry the name of Phalaris, who was so much older than her, must needs be an imposture. — BENTLEY, Dissertation upon Phalaris (Ed. Dyce), volume ii. page 126. 276 English Language. also dropped the final -;/ at the same time. Corre- sponding to the genitive plurals, also, were the adjective pronouns ure or user, 'our,' and eower, 'your.' The corresponding adjective pronoun of the third person was sin ; but, even when Anglo-Saxon was committed to writing, it was already on the point of dying out. Sin occurs not often under any circumstances, and almost wholly in poetry, though it is not unknown to prose. 1 Its loss has been a serious disadvantage to the precision and clearness of the language ; for while its place was taken in Anglo-Saxon by the genitives his, hire, and hira of the third personal pronoun, it was not filled. 119. These genitives of the first and second per- sonal pronouns were, therefore, the same in form as the nominative singular of the corresponding posses- sive pronouns during the Anglo-Saxon period. But, inasmuch as then the former were governed directly by verbs or prepositions, while the latter had full ad- jective inflections, the distinction between them was in most cases apparent. The changes that subsequently took place in the language rendered this distinction less obvious. On the one hand, the genitive became more and more confined to the expression of the possessive relation, and was no longer made the object of verbs and prepositions. On the other hand, the adjective inflection of the possessive pronoun had en- tirely disappeared. As a result the distinction between the two classes became rather nominal than real. 1 E.g., Blickl'mg Homilies, page 125, line 21. The Personal Pronouns. 277 Whether the same word should be regarded as the genitive of the personal pronoun, or itself as the pos- sessive adjective pronoun, depended mainly upon definition. The genitive, especially in the plural, lasted down, to be sure, to the end of the fourteenth century, in phrases in which there could be no doubt as to its being a personal pronoun, such as, at onre alther cost, 1 meaning ' at the cost of us all ; ' or, / am yowre aller lied, I am yowre aller hele, 2 that is, ' I am the head of you all, I am the salvation (heat) of you all.' Even down to the beginning of the sixteenth century similar usages occasionally occur. 3 Still such expressions as these, comparatively infrequent then, have not been preserved in Modern English : hence some grammarians consider the genitive of the per- sonal pronouns as no longer existing, terming these forms, wherever they occur, possessive adjective pro- nouns. In either case their history is the same. 120. The contracted forms mi and thi, for min and thin, made their appearance at the end of the twelfth century, and were at first used indifferently. As early certainly as the fourteenth century, however, a prac- tice sprang up of using min and thin before words beginning with a vowel or silent //, and mi and tlii before consonants. This custom, it may be added, 1 Chaucer, Canterbury Tales, Prologue, line 799. 2 Langland, Piers Plowman, Text B, xix. 468. 3 It was their bothes (' of them both ') dishonoures and theirs and hirs also to suffer hvm in sanctuary. — Sir Thomas More, Life of Edward /'. in Ellis's reprint of Harding's Chronicle, etc., page 487. 278 English Language. extended to non, ' none,' with the result that the abbreviated form no has become the established one in Modern English. The practice was observed, with a fair degree of regularity, up to the latter half of the sixteenth century, after which it became largely a mat- ter of individual choice. In process of time my and thy, as they had then generally come to be spelled, were used almost exclusively before nouns, and mine and thine when standing alone in the predicate, except in a few phrases, such as ' mine host,' that had sur- vived the general abandonment of the ancient usage. The e of mine and thine is, of course, inorganic. 121. The restriction of mine and thine to the abso- lute construction in the predicate was undoubtedly aided, to a great extent, by the creation of the forms oures, you res, and hires, ' hers,' and heres, ' theirs,' and their confinement to this same employment. Originally the pronoun, when used absolutely in the predicate, had simply the form of the genitive of the personal pronoun, which was the same as the nomi- native of the possessive. This was the prevalent prac- tice, not only in the Anglo-Saxon, but during the Old English period also, at least in the Midland and South- ern dialects. For example, the sentence ' the land is ours ' would in the thirteenth century have appeared as ' the land is oure.' The feeling, that, in such con- structions, the pronouns were really genitives of the personal pronoun, and not possessive adjectives, seems to have been the ruling one. But by the four- teenth century, -s had become the common termina- The Personal Pronouns. 279 tion of the genitive of all nouns, and was the termi- nation of his, the masculine and neuter genitive of the third personal pronoun. This letter was in conse- quence added by a false analogy to the other forms. Accordingly, early in the Middle English period, oures, yourcs, hires, ' hers,' heres, ' theirs,' took their place alongside of the earlier oure, youre, hire, and here. The former, therefore, are strictly double genitives. They first made their appearance in the speech of the North, but, in the fourteenth century, became thor- oughly established in the literary language of the Midland dialect. For a time they flourished side by side with the forms without -s, which etymologically are more correct. In the fifteenth century they dis- placed the latter altogether, and are now the ones exclusively in use in the construction mentioned. 1 When their was adopted as the genitive of the per- sonal pronoun, in place of here (108), it also added an -s in such cases, like the others. 122. This result did not happen, however, without a struggle. Other forms existed, which have left traces of themselves, in the language of the unedu- cated, to this day. The old ^-declension, both of the noun and adjective, still survived in the fourteenth century in certain parts of the country. It was then, as we have seen, applied to words which had no right to it in Anglo-Saxon. Various dialects, consequently, 1 The latest use of the simple form — not as an intentional archa- ism — I have observed is in Capgrave's Chronicle of England (about 1450) , under date of A.D. 1024 ; " They feyned it was her (hers)," 280 English Language. especially of the South of England, instead of form- ing, in these cases, a double genitive in -s, formed one in -;/. The result was, that, in place of oures, youres, hires, and heres, they had the forms oitren, youren, hiren, heren (i.e., their'n). To this the analogy of mine and thine unquestionably contributed. These forms in -n are not infrequent in the Wycliffite ver- sion of the Bible, made about 1380. Inconsequence, during the latter half of the fourteenth century, the genitive of the personal pronoun, when used in the predicate, can be found in three forms, — without any ending, with the ending -s, or with the ending -//. The following examples will show this clearly : — I wil beyoure in al that ever I may. Chaucer, Canon's Yeoman's Tale, line 237. My gold is youres, whanne that you lest. Shipman's Tale, line 2S4. But the erthetilieris seiden togidere, This is the eire; come ye, sle we hym, and the eritage schal be ourun. — Mark xii. 8. Blessed be the pore in spirit, for the kyngdam in hevenes is heren (theirs). — Matthew v. 3. Restore thou to hir alle thinges that ben hern (hers). // /Cings viii. 6 (Purvey's Recension). 123. The forms in -//, however, speedily disap- peared from the language of literature, though they have exhibited a marked vitality in the language of low life, litre, again, whenever their took the place of here, their 1 n was formed, after the analogy of the other forms in -//, by those who employed the latter. The Personal Pronouns. 281 In fact, this was sometimes extended to his, giving us hisen or his'n as a collateral form. This can be found as early as the fifteenth century. In one of the man- uscripts of Chaucer occur, for example, the following lines : — Hire fredom fond Arcyte in such manere That al hisen is that hirs was, moche or lyte. Anelida and Ay cite, line 107 (Harleian M.S. 372). These forms in -;/, it is to be said finally, were once falsely explained as contractions of our own, your own, her own, and so forth. 124. A somewhat peculiar use of his to take the place of the ending of the genitive case developed itself in Old English, and prevailed somewhat exten- sively in the early portion of the Modern English period. We can see it exemplified in the following passage from Shakspeare's fifty-fifth sonnet : — Nor Mars his sword nor war's quick fire shall burn The living record of your memory. Traces of this usage can be discovered even in Anglo- Saxon. 1 In the first text of Layamon, written about 1200, it occurs rarely, but is frequently found in the second text, supposed to be about fifty years later. But it was not till the sixteenth century that it began to appear often. It is almost always used with names of persons, particularly with those ending with the 1 Matzner quotes from Numbers xiii. 29 : \>xr we gesawon Enac his cynryn. In Authorized Version; We saw the children of Anak there. lb., verse 28. 282 English Language. sound of s. After the middle of the seventeenth century it was but little employed, though it lasted into the eighteenth. The title of Pope's translation from Statius, first printed in 171 2, has, for instance, the heading, " The First Book of Statius his Thebais." In scattered instances and in peculiar constructions this use of his can be found much later. 125. This peculiar use of his as a genitive sign led to the belief which once largely prevailed, that the -es of the genitive singular — which in Early English often appeared as -is or -ys — was in its origin a contraction of the pronoun his. This was not only widely accepted, but was at one time held and taught by many grammarians, in particular by those of the seventeenth century. Even as late as 1711, Addison, in commenting on the letter s, gives in his adhesion to this view. " I might here observe," he says, " that the same single letter on many occasions does the office of a whole word and represents the his and het of our forefathers." ' This belief in regard to his led to the extension in the sixteenth century of the same construction to her with feminine nouns, and occa- sionally to their with the plural. For instance, Bar- nabe Riche, in his story of Apollonius and Silla, in the work published in 15S1, under the title of "Riche his Farewell to Militarie Profession," begins his account of the heroine with these words : — The daughter her name was Silla. 2 1 Spectator, No. 135, Aug. |. 1711. - Shakspeare Society reprint (1846), page 69. For their as The Reflexive Pronouns. 283 Still, as in the similar case of his, the pronoun was rarely used, save with the names of persons. 126. In Anglo-Saxon the simple personal pronouns were constantly employed also as reflexives. This use of them has lasted down through all periods of the language to this day, though it is far less common now than formerly. From its very nature it led fre- quently to ambiguity. If there were no other reflexives than the simple personal pronouns, such an expression as " he killed him " would have, beside the sense it now has, the possible signification of " he killed him- self." Consequently a disposition began to be mani- fested in the earliest speech, to make the reflexive sense more clear and emphatic. This was accom- plished by the addition of the forms of the adjective self to the corresponding forms of the personal pro- nouns ; thus the dative himself would be in Anglo- Saxon him sclfuin ; the accusative, hine selfne. This tendency has gone on increasing to the present time, so that outside of the language of poetry, the simple personal pronouns are rarely used any longer in a reflexive sense. When this does occur, it is usually in phrases where the context would dispel any doubt as to the meaning. It is perhaps most common when the pronoun is preceded by a preposition, though even here it is far from being universal. In such an representing the 's of the genitive, the following example will serve, from Humphrey Monmouth's petition to Cardinal Wolsey, in 1528. " I did promise him (Tyndale) x I. sterling to paie for my father and mother there sowles and al Christen sowles." 284 English Language. expression as " he looked about him," him is a genuine reflexive, precisely equivalent in meaning to himself. On the other hand, in the expression " he looked at him," him is the simple personal pronoun. 127. During the Old English period, self, like other adjectives, gradually lost its inflection. In conse- quence it was often looked upon, both then and later, merely as a substantive, forming by its combina- tion with the personal pronoun an independent word. This tendency was even seen in the Anglo-Saxon. 1 This seems to be the reason why self, when stripped of its inflections, was joined to the genitive of the pronouns of the first and second persons, or, perhaps, it would be more correct to say, it was treated as a substantive, with which agreed the possessive adjective pronouns corresponding to the genitive of these per- sonal pronouns. At any rate, during the Old English period, the forms myself, thyself ourself and yourself became established in the language and have since remained unchanged. Along with them were also in use, me self, tliee self, us self, and you self. Moth kinds of forms, in fact, were sometimes employed in the same work. Still the latter, based upon the joining of self to the original dative case, called later the objec- tive, could not maintain itself against the former, and died out during the Middle English period. 128. The case was different with the pronouns of 1 Matzner cites, along with others, the following extract from the Anglo-Saxon Gospel of Nicodemus, 34: Hym sylf wees on Fenas farende. The Reflexive Pronouns. 285 the third person. There the forms resulting from the combination of self with the dative became the ones established in the language. Himself herself and hemself "themselves," were the forms earl}- in established use. Itself really belongs to the same class, because in the adoption of the dative to represent both the original dative and accusative, it, though strictly an accusative, had for reasons previously given (no) become the new objective. Later there were attempts occasionally made to cause these reflexives to conform to those of the first and second persons. In the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries particularly, his self and their self or their selves are occasionally found ; but they never could be said to have anything like the prevalence of the common forms. 129. The form themselves, for which theirselves was sometimes substituted, represents a plural inflection which these pronouns were late in receiving. The only modification that for a long time took place in them was the frequent adding of the syllable -en, — sometimes abbreviated to e, — giving such forms as myselve{ii), himselve(n). This termination, however, furnished merely a collateral form : it did not indicate inflection. The plural of these reflexives remained the same as the singular ; no distinction existed between them till towards the close of the Middle English period. As late as the beginning of the sixteenth century oursetf and yourself, for illustration, would be gener- ally, perhaps invariably, the same in both numbers. In the first half of the century, however, the plural 286 English Language. ending -s was added to the reflexive forms which were plural in signification, and this practice speedily became universal. In conclusion, the disposition to use, as the subject of the sentence, the personal pro-' noun compounded with self in place of the corre- sponding simple personal pronoun 1 goes back to the Old English, if not to the Anglo-Saxon, 2 period, and has been in common and constant use since. 130. There remains a usage the consideration of which belongs more strictly to syntax than even the one just mentioned ; but, as it is of some importance as connected with the disuse of certain forms of the verb, it will receive a slight notice at this point. This is the general abandonment in English of the singular pronoun of the second person, and the substitution of the plural in its place. In this respect our tongue does not differ from the other cultivated tongues of modern Europe ; but, in its avoidance of this particu- lar form, it has gone far beyond them all. In them it is the language of superiority, or affectionate intimacy ; with us it is, outside of its employment in poetry, limited, for all practical purposes, to the language of prayer. This result has been reached gradually. The Anglo-Saxon, like the Greek and Latin, never used, in addressing an individual, anything but the second person of the singular; and this continued to be the case, in our tongue also, for nearly two centuries after the Conquest. 1 E.g. Myself am Naples. SHAKSPEARE, Tempest, act i. sc. 2. - Sec see. 127, note. Pronouns of Address. 287 131. The substitution of the plural ye and you for thou and thee in speaking to a single person, made its appearance in the language towards the close of the thirteenth century. At the outset it was not merely little in use, it was restricted to narrow and well-defined limits. When so substituted, it was generally, if not invariably, employed as a mark of respect in address- ing a superior. In the fourteenth and fifteenth cen- turies the use of the plural steadily increased, and in the sixteenth century it became the standard form of polite conversation. Thou and thee followed to some extent the history of similar forms in other tongues. For some two centuries it may be said that in a general way they were employed to denote affection or inferiority or contempt. There is a well-known passage in Shakspeare, in which one of the characters is represented as urging another to write an insulting challenge. 1 "Taunt him," he says, "with the license of ink : if thou thou 'st him some thrice, it shall not be amiss." This example is frequently coupled with the abusive language directed by Coke, the attorney- general, towards Sir Walter Raleigh, when the latter was undergoing trial for high treason in November, 1603. During the proceedings Raleigh was addressed as you by those acting as judges. This pronoun was sometimes employed also by the attorney-general, but whenever he wished to express denunciation, he re- sorted to thou, and did so intentionally. When Raleigh denied that he was responsible for Lord 1 Twelfth Night, act iii. sc. 2. 288 English Language. * ** Cobham's course, Coke retorted, " All that he did was by thy instigation, thou viper : for I thou thee, thdu traitor ! " l 132. Such examples are sufficient to show that the use of the singular towards persons of the same station, but standing in no special relation of intimacy to one another, was intended to be insulting and was so regarded. Its employment towards inferiors and for the purpose of expressing affection can be met with constantly, especially in the pages of the Elizabethan dramatists. Yet the distinction between thou, thee and ye, you, was never thorough-going in English. The rigid rules that have been authoritatively laid down for their exact employment will not stand the test of careful examination. The same character addressing another in the same conversation will frequently pass from the singular pronoun to the plural, and from the plural pro- noun to the singular, without any conceivable reason. The transition will sometimes even occur in the same sentence. In particular, it is often the case that the nominative or objective of the singular will be found immediately joined with the possessive pronoun repre- senting the plural. The pages of any Elizabethan 1 The following conversation between the two, later in the trial, will show the use of these pronouns: — Coke. Thou art the most vile and execrable traitor that ever lived. Raleigh. You speak indiscreetly, barbarously, and uncivilly. ie. I want words sufficient to express thy viperous treason. Raleigh, I think you want words, indeed, for you have spoken one thing half a dozen times. Coke. Thou art an odious fellow; thy name is hateful to all the realm ol England for thy pride. The Interrogative Pronouns. 289 dramatist will exemplify these practices. 1 But after the sixteenth century, the singular form was more and more disused, and by the eighteenth had become com- paratively infrequent. As thou was almost the only subject the second person of the verb ever had, the disuse of the pronoun led indirectly to the compara- tive disuse of this form of the verb. The Interrogative Pronouns. 133. In the Anglo-Saxon period the interrogative pronouns were hwa, ' who ' ; hwcet, ' what ' ; hwile, ' of what sort ' ; aud hwceder, ' which of two.' During the twelfth century the words which had originally begun with the combination hw changed their form, and were spelled with wh; and this has from that time remained the universal practice. Of these four inter- rogatives, hwilc and hwcede r had a full set of adjective inflections according to the indefinite declension, vary- ing therefore with the gender. On the other hand, hwa was used both as a masculine and a feminine, the special feminine form which belonged to the primitive Teutonic having disappeared from the Anglo-Saxon and from the other sister-languages, with the excep- tion of the Gothic. Of course, hwcet is strictly the neuter of hwa. 134. In Anglo-Saxon, hwa and hwcet have the following inflections : — 't> 1 E.g. I am more serious than my custom : you Must be so too, if heed me ; which to do Trebles thee o'er. SHAKSPEARE, Tempest, act ii. sc. 1. 290 English Language. Masculine and Feminine. Neuter. Nom. hwa, hwret, Gen. hvvses, hw.es, Dal. hwam, hwam, Ace. hwone. hwret, Inst. hwy. In general it can be said that this pronoun has had the same history essentially as the personal pronouns, especially the pronoun of the third person. In the Early English period the dative hwam, ' whom,' sup- planted the accusative hwone in the masculine, as him did hine. As him gradually became confined to this gender, and the accusative hit or it took its place in the neuter, so whom came, even earlier, to be used only of persons, and the accusative what was con- fined to inquiries about objects without life. Again, just as his lost its original neuter sense, and was re- placed by its, so whose has been limited to persons. Questions in regard to things are no longer intro- duced by whose, but instead by what or which with the preposition of. 135. So, also, in the sixteenth century, the same confounding of the nominative and objective cases that occurred with the personal pronouns occurred also with this interrogative. Whom is sometimes used where strict grammar requires who ; but far more frequently was who used where whom would be the form expected. This usage becomes first con- spicuous in the dramatic writings ^[ the Elizabethan The Interrogative Pronouns. 291 period. In them sentences such as these constantly occur : — Who have we here ? — Peele, Edward I. Who do you take me to be ? — Greene, George a- Greene. I see who he laughed at. — Jonson, Every Man in his Humor. The frequency with which they are put into the mouths of speakers of every social grade furnishes clear proof that they were not felt to be improper. But the usage of who for whom is far from having been lim- ited to this period. It may be said to have charac- terized the colloquial speech of England from the latter half of the sixteenth century to the present time, if the language of conversation has been justly repre- sented in the literature which purports to reproduce it. So widespread and persistent is this usage, in fact, that such a strictly correct sentence, for instance, as "Whom did you go to see?" is regarded by many educated men as being of the nature of a pedantic deviation from the normal method of expression, and as representing the artificial speech of grammarians, rather than the natural speech of real life. 136. Hivilc was represented in the dialects and sub-dialects of Early English by various forms, among which are whulc, wulch, juucli, wich, quilk, whilk, and which. Some of them have been made somewhat familiar by their occurrence in the Scotch dialect. As early as the Middle English period, however, which had become established in the language of literature, 292 English Language. and has ever since remained die standard form. Like its correlative, swile, which became such ( 101 ), it is a compound of lie, ' like,' and was originally inflected according to the indefinite declension of the adjective. The history of its forms is consequently included in the history of that part of speech. 137. A similar statement can be made of the inter- rogative hweeder, ' which of two,' which was originally inflected like the indefinite adjective. The dual sense of this word began to fail even in the Anglo-Saxon period. In consequence it was sometimes strength- ened by the numeral, as in Matthew, chapter xxi., verse 31, where, in the Anglo-Saxon version, we read : — HwceNer I>ara twegra dyde bees feeder vvillan ? This, in the sixteenth century translation now used by us, has the same construction : " Whether of them twain did the will of his father?" The use of w 'h ether as an interrogative pronoun was never very common, at least after the fourteenth century. It occasionally made its appearance, indeed, down to the end of the sixteenth, as, for example : — To whether didst thou yield ? — Spanish Tragedy, act i. [ts place was taken by which. The corresponding interrogative adverb whether also ceased to be used in direct questions,' though in indirect ones it is regularly employ* 'I. 1 A'.;'. Whether am I not betere to thee than ten sones ? — / Samuel i. 8 (Wycliffite version). The Relative Pronouns. 293 138. An interrogative pronoun, signifying "who of many," existed in the primitive Teutonic, and was transmitted to the Gothic and the Old Norse, but was not preserved in the High German or in any dialect of the Low Germanic group. Compound forms of the interrogatives have been in use during every period of English ; but the inflection of the simple forms has not been in the least modified by this fact. In con- clusion, it is to be remarked that the instrumental case hwy has given to the tongue the two interrogative adverbs how and why. The Relative Pronouns. 139. The Teutonic did not possess a relative in the strict sense of the word ; and, for the representation of it, the English, during every period of its history, has been obliged to have recourse to other pronouns. In Anglo-Saxon the duty of the relative was performed by the following words or phrases : — 1. By the demonstrative pronoun se, seo. ficct. 2. By fie the collateral form of the demonstrative se. As this was indeclinable, it could be employed for an antecedent of any gender, number, or person. 3. By the joining of the indeclinable/^ to the forms of the demonstrative, giving, for example, in the nomi- native singular, se fie, seo fie, ficct fie, or ficette. 4. By the joining of fie to the personal pronouns, frequently with words intervening. 140. After the Conquest the use of fie was the first 294 English Language. to be given up, — a result which was unavoidably hastened by the disposition to employ that form ex- clusively for the definite article. Still it was used occasionally as late as the beginning of the thirteenth century. All the forms of the demonstrative se, seo, /net, were maintained as relatives down to the end of the twelfth century with varying degrees of vitality. The one that was most in use, however, was the neuter nominative and accusative singular /net. This speedily took the place of the old indeclinable />e as the repre- sentative of all persons, genders, numbers, and cases. By the beginning of the thirteenth century the use of that as a general relative, referring both to persons and things, was widely established ; by the middle of the same century it had become universal. Such it has remained through every subsequent period of English. Other words have taken their place alongside of it ; but there has never been a time since the twelfth cen- tury when it has not been in constant employment as a relative. 141. With this form alone, however, the language was not content. At an early period it began to resort to the interrogative pronouns for additional relatives. The first of these that came into general use was which. The employment of this interrogative as a relative goes back to the beginning of the thirteenth century, and by the end of the fourteenth it was thoroughly established. It was sometimes preceded by the definite article, giving us the expression the which. This was not uncommon in Kariy English, The Relative Pronouns. 295 but it is now archaic, and rarely found except in the language of poetry. Still more frequently, perhaps, was which followed by that The tendency to use the simple form alone constantly grew stronger, however, and after the fourteenth century it became the general practice. From this century till the seventeenth it was regularly employed in reference to persons as well as to things. This idiom has been made familiar to all by the phrase " Our Father which art in heaven," occurring in the Lord's Prayer. In the seventeenth century the tendency manifested itself, with the in- creasing use of who as a relative, to confine the reference of which solely to things. This may be said to have now become established. But in many kinds of expression usage is still very uncertain, and no hard and fast rules can be laid down about the employment of this relative which will be sanctioned by the uni- form practice of the best writers. 142. At an early period, whose, and whom, the oblique cases of the interrogative who, were also used as relatives. This practice may be said to have origi- nated about the beginning of the thirteenth century, and to have steadily increased in use from that time. Sometimes, though rarely, these words, like which, were preceded by the} The use of the nominative who as a relative was later. It was not till the early 1 Desyryng evere more To knowen fully, if it youre wille were, How ye han ferd and don whyl ye be there : The w/ios welfare and hele ek God encresse. Chaucer, Trdihis and Ctyseyde, v. 1356-1359. 296 English Language. part of the sixteenth century that its employment in this way was established, though occasional instances of such usage occur previously. Nor was who, even during the sixteenth century, common as a relative, though constantly becoming more so ; but in the seventeenth century it came into general use. 143. At the outset who as a relative was not abso- lutely limited to persons : it occasionally, though not frequently, referred to objects without life. From the latter, however, it was shut out by the distinction that gradually developed itself between it and which, in accordance wherewith the former was confined to personal and the latter to impersonal antecedents. In this matter the objective whom has the same his- tory as the nominative who. On the other hand, the genitive whose as a relative, has, during all the periods of English, been applied equally to persons and to things. In the latter usage it is etymologically the genitive, not of who, but of what (134) ; and in sense it corresponds both to ' of whom ' and to ' of which.' The grammatical rule sometimes laid down that re- quires its antecedent to be a person is neither based upon the etymology of the word, nor what in this matter is of more importance, the usage of the best writers and speakers. 144. It will be seen from the foregoing account that the oldest of our existing relatives is that, and who the youngest; and furthermore, that the marked dis- tinction between the use of who and which is later than the sixteenth century. Yet how completely all The Relative Pronouns. 297 knowledge of these facts had been lost by the begin- ning of the eighteenth century is clearly shown by one of the essays in the Spectator. In No. 78 of that periodical, which appeared on May 30, 171 i v Steele, the author, appended " the humble petition of who and which." In it, among other things, the petitioners are represented as making the following statements : — We are descended of ancient families, and kept up our dignity and honor many years, till the jack-sprat THAT sup- planted us. How often have we found ourselves slighted by the clergy in their pulpits and the lawyers at the bar. Nay, how often have we heard in one of the most polite and august assemblies in the universe, to our great mortification, these words, "That that that noble lord urged"; which if one of us had had justice done, would have sounded nobler thus, " That which that noble lord urged.'' Senates themselves, the guar- dians of British liberty, have degraded us and preferred that to us; and yet no decree was ever given against us. In the very acts of parliament, in which the utmost right should be done to every body, word and thing, we find ourselves often either not used, or used one instead of another. In the first and best prayer children are taught, they learn to misuse us. "Our Father which art in heaven " should be " Our Father who art in heaven"; and even a convocation, after long debates, refused to consent to an alteration of it. In our general confession we say, " Spare thou them, O God, which confess their faults," which ought to be "who confess their faults." What hopes then have we of having justice done us, when the makers of our very prayers and laws, and the most learned in all faculties, seem to be in a confederacy against us, and our enemies them- selves must be our judges? 145. The confusion between the nominative and objective of the interrogative who naturally extended 298 English Language. itself to the word when used as a relative. In one instance the confusion has perpetuated itself to our own time, and has become established in usage. This is in the phrase than whom, which has been both com- mon and classical from the latter half of the sixteenth century. Modern grammarians, in this case, are often disposed in consequence to treat than, not as a con- junction, but as a preposition. There is reason to suppose that the general perpetuation, if not the cre- ation of this particular idiom, was largely influenced by the two constructions in Latin of the comparative with quam, and with the ablative. 146. One relative construction lasted down to the beginning of the Middle English period, and then died out, except in the language of low life. This is the fourth one mentioned, as found in Anglo-Saxon, in which the demonstrative se, seo, fiat was united with a personal pronoun. This continued to survive in a modified form. The demonstrative that was joined with the pronouns of the third person, usually with a number of words intervening, to form the relative. Accordingly that — he was equivalent to who; that — his and tliat — her to whose; that — him and that — hem to whom or which. This relative construction is found sometimes in Chaucer, and may be illustrated by the following examples: — A Knight there was and that a worthy man, That fro tlic tyme that he first began To ryden out, he loved chivalrye. Prologue to Canterbury 'Jala, lines 43-45. The Indefinite Pronouns. 299 Now fele I wel the goodnesse of this wyf, That bothe after her deeth and in her lyf, Her grete bountee doubleth her renoun. Legend of Good Women, lines 522-524. Wel the hotter ben the gledis 1 rede, 1'hat men hem wren' 2 with asshen pale and dede. Troilus and Cryseyde, ii. 539. Ill the modern language of low life in which this idiom is preserved, which takes the place of that. 6 147. The indefinite pronouns, as has been stated, had, in general, either the inflection of the noun or of the adjective, usually the latter. The words so entitled, which existed in Anglo-Saxon, excluding the compound forms, have been transmitted to Modern English, with two exceptions. These are the indeclinable /?/zwan). 3. sigh (sicari). 8. twit (ael-w~itati). 4. slip? (s/if>an). r writhe ■> 5. slit? (sfitan). ( wntne -> t wreathe J Here also it may be proper to include the two follow- ing words, which lasted down to the beginning of Modern English : — flite, from fit tan, ' to scold.' sty, from stlgan, ' to ascend.' 178. To the list of verbs which once belonged to this class is to be added rive. This came into the language from the Old Norse, and exhibited in Early English the following inflection : — Infinitive. Preterite Singular. Preterite Plural. Past Participle. rive(n), rof, riven, riven. Refore the beginning of the Modern English period, the verb had gone over to the weak conjugation, leav- ing behind it, however, in good use, the strong past participle riven. Strong Verbs. — Class II. 319 179. Wreathe seems to be nothing but a variant of writhe, but it was perhaps derived directly from the substantive wreath. The strong past participle writhen is archaic, and the corresponding wreathen belongs to the language of poetry. Twit, as is seen, is a com- pound, of which the final letter of the prefix has been retained with the verb. The simple verb w'ltan, ' to blame,' 'to find fault with,' which entered into the com- pound, did not die out till the Middle English period. STRONG VERBS. — CLASS II. 180. In the Anglo-Saxon verbs of this class, the variation of the radical vowel was as follows : — eo -1 ea, u; There were more than fifty of these verbs in Anglo- Saxon, of which only the following survive : — 1. choose, ceosan; ceas, curon; coren. choose chose chosen 2. cleave ('to split'), cleofan; cleaf, clufon; clofen. cleave clove cloven 3- fly. 4. freeze, 5. seethe, 6. shoot, fleogan; fleah, flugon; flogen. fly flein flotvn freosan; freas fruron; froren. freeze froze frozen seo'San; seaft, sudon; soden. seethe shoot sod shot sodden sceotan; sceat scuton; scoten. shot. 320 EnglisJi Language. 181. A very marked peculiarity in the history of this class is the extent of the variation which the forms have undergone. The modern ones, in consequence, can hardly be said in most cases to be derived from the ones found in Anglo-Saxon. The following most important of these variations will be noted : — 182. (1) The change of ; to r (14). This took place in certain forms of the original verb, but has now been abandoned. In consequence, coren has been replaced by chosen, and froren by frozen. Froren or fro re is still in poetic use, however, as an adjective. 1 The same thing can be said of lorn and forlorn, originally past participles of leosan and forleosan. Leosan, 'to lose,' a verb of this class, which has gone over to the weak conjugation, was apparently known to Anglo-Saxon only in compounds. In Early English, however, it appears, and frequently presents the fol- lowing inflection : — lesen; les, lore(n); lor(e)n. An Anglo-Saxon weak verb losian, losode, ' to be lost,' may have had some influence on the modern form, but this is very doubtful. 183. (2) The extent to which the vowel of the past participle made its way into the preterite. The 1 My hart-blood is wel nigh frorne, I feele. Spenser, Skepheards Calender, February. The parching air Burns/zwv, and cold performs the effect of fire. MILTON, Paradise Lost, ii. 595. Strong Verbs. — Class II 321 Early English preterites dies, cl7]f,fres, seth, and sliet have been uniformly given up for forms containing o. This tendency began to show itself in the Old English period. The only exception to the universality of this rule is fly. 184. (3) The fact that two of these words, choose and shoot, have replaced, with forms containing 00, the regularly descended forms of the infinitive, chese(n) and shete(/i). A similar statement can be made of the originally strong verb of this class, lese(n), which has given place to lose. 185. In regard to individual words, cleave, con- stantly confounded with cleave of Class I. (167), has had likewise the preterite clave. It also developed in the Old English period the regular weak form cleaved, and in the Middle English the irregular weak form cleft. This latter is still very common. Seethe has developed also the weak form seethed. This appar- ently did not come into much, if any, use till the Modern English period, but it has now generally taken the place of the strong forms, which seem in conse- quence somewhat archaic. Still, the word itself is employed comparatively little. The forms of fleogan, ' to fly,' were from the outset confused with those of fleohan, ' to flee ' ; and this is doubtless one of the reasons why the principal parts of the former verb have had an exceptional development of their own. It remains to be said that b"eodan, ' to offer,' of this class, has been confounded with biddan, ' to ask,' of Class V., as will be pointed out later (217). 322 English Language. 186. The following verbs of this class have gone over to the weak conjugation. The first list contains the words which had originally eo in the infinitive, the second Tt. 1. brew (breotvari). 6. float, fleet (Jteotan). 2. chew (ceowan). 7. lie, 'to deceive' (Jeogari). 3. creep (creopan). 8. lose (-leosan). 4. crowd (creodan). 9. rue (hreowari). 5. flee (jlt'on). IO. sprout (spreotan, spr titan). 11. bow (Jmgan). 14. shove (scufan). 12. brook (brucari). 15. suck? (sucan). 13. rout, 'to snore' (Jirutan). 16. sup? (supan). To these may be added the following dialectic or archaic words, which appear still occasionally in the literary speech : — dree, from dreogan, ' to suffer.' lout, from lutan, ' to bow.' 1 187. The Anglo-Saxon verb fleotan was regularly represented in Middle English by the form flete, and the form flotc, though occurring, does not occur often. The spelling of the Modern English verb may have been affected by the substantive flota, ' a vessel,' though this is doubtful. Creep, another one of these verbs, has the strong preterite and participle erope and cropen in occasional use early in the Modern English 1 For example, the Scotch phrase, To dree one's weird, " to endure one's fate." Also He faire the knight saluted, touting low. SPENSER, Faerie Queene, I. i. 30. Strong Verbs. — Class III. 323 period, and dialectically it continues to exist until this day. 188. Some of the Anglo-Saxon verbs of this class have weak forms alongside of the strong ones, and from either one of these the modern weak verb may have been derived. Thus reek may have descended from the strong verb reocan, ' to smoke, exhale,' or from the weak recan, with the same meaning. One of the strong verbs of this class, dufan, did not per- petuate itself; but the weak collateral verb dyfan survives in the word dive. This, in the language of common life, has of late exhibited a tendency to as- sume in the preterite the form dove, after the analogy of drive of Class I. From colloquial speech it has nat- urally now and then made its way into literature, as, for example : — Straight into the river Kwasind Plunged as if he were an otter, Dove as if he were a beaver. Longfellow, Hiawatha, vii. (original edition). STRONG VERBS. — CLASS III. 189. The verbs in this class fall into three divisions according to the following schemes of vowel-varia- tion : — 1. i; a(o), u; u. 2. e ; ea, u; o. 3. eo; ea, u; o. Besides these there were a few verbs in Anglo- 324 English Language. Saxon which underwent special variations of their own. These are indicated in the following scheme : — e; se, u; o. i; se, u; u. u; ea, u; 190. There were between seventy-five and eighty verbs in the whole class. The following twenty-two found in Modern English represent the members of the first subdivision : — I. bind, bindan; band, bundon; bunden. bind bound bound 2. climb, climban; clamb, clumbon ; clumben. climb clomb clomb 3- cling, 1 clingan; clang, clungon; clungen. cling clung clung 4- drink, drincan; dranc, druncon; druncen. drink drank drunk drunk 5- find, findan ; fand, fundon ; funden. find foum / found 6. -gin, -gin nan; -gan, -gunnon; -gun nen. -gin ■gan -gun -gun 7- grind, grindan; grand, grundon; grunden. grind ground ground 8. run, rinnan; ran, 111 1111 on; ruiinen. run ran run 9- shrink, scrincan; scranc, scruncon; scruncen. shrink shrank shrunk shrunk 0. sing, singan; sang, sungon; sungen. sing sang sung sung 1 The Anglo-Saxon clingan meant 'to shrink,' and win nan 'to labor.' Strong Verbs. — Class III. 325 1 1. sink, sincan; sane, suncon ; suncen. sink sank sunk sunk 12. sling, slingan; sling slang, si U Jig slungon ; slungen. slung 13- slink, slincan; slink slanc, stank sluncon; slunk sluncen. slunk 14. spin, spinnan; spin span, spun spunnon; spunnen. spun «5- spring, springan; spring sprang, sprang sprungon ; sprung sprungen. sprung 16. sting, stingan; sting stang, stung stungon; stun gen. slung 17- stink, stincan; stink stanc, stank stuncon; stunk stuncen. stunk 18. swim, swimman; swam, swummon ; swum men swim sivam swum swum 19. swing, swingan; swing swang, swungon ; swung swungen. swung 20. win, 1 winnan; wan, wunnon; wunnen. win won won 21. wind, vvindan; wand, wundon; wunden. wind » wound wound 22. wring, wringan ; wring wrang, wrungon; wrung wrungen. zurung The two following are the sole representatives now existing of the second and third subdivisions : — 23. help, helpan; help healp, hulpon; holp holpen. holpen 24. fight, feohtan ; fight feaht, fuhton; fought fohten. fought 1 See note, preceding page. 326 English Language. 191. In Modern English the variation of the radi- cal vowel has generally been according to the following scheme : — i ; a or u ; u. But besides the cases of individual verbs to be con- sidered separately, those which ended in -nd — bind, find, grind, and wind — have invariably lengthened in the literary language the short vowel of the preterite and past participle into the diphthong ou. These same verbs have likewise lengthened the vowel of the infini- tive and the present tense, which is long only by po- sition, into the diphthongal sound of i, as has also climb. 192. This class of strong verbs received during the Old English period the two verbs now inflected as follows :. — 25. fling; flung; flung. 26. ring; rang or rung; rung. 193. Fling is a word that came into our tongue from the Norse. Since its introduction it has never been inflected otherwise than according to the strong conjugation. In Early English it had also the preterite flang. Ring is from the weak Anglo-Saxon verb hringan, hringde. Like fling, it doubtless assumed the strong inflection after the analogy of sing, spring, and similar words. It does not appear to have shown weak forms after the Anglo-Saxon period. 194. During the Modern English period strong in- flections have been developed by three verbs, which Strong Verbs. — Class III 327 may be assigned most appropriately to this class. They are the following : — 27. dig; dug; dug. 28. stick ; stuck ; stuck. 29. string; strung; strung 195. Of these words dig is of somewhat uncertain origin, though the derivation can perhaps be ascribed reasonably, if remotely, to Anglo-Saxon dician, dicode, ' to make a dike, mound, or ditch.' In the form in which it now appears it does not seem, however, to have been used before the fourteenth century. It had then, and for several centuries following, the weak preterite and past participle digged. The strong form, dug, did not become common, if, indeed, it was known at all, until the eighteenth century. It cannot be found in the authorized version of the Bible, in Shak- speare, or in the poetry of Milton. In all of these the preterite was digged. This latter form has now become archaic. 196. Stick is derived directly from the weak Anglo- Saxon verb stician, sticode, having the meaning of ' to adhere.' The form stiked for the preterite and past participle is common in the literary language of the fourteenth century ; but, in the sixteenth, stuck had become instead the regular form. The transition doubtless took place during the Middle English period. There was an Early English strong verb, steken, 'to pierce,' which has also a right to be considered as one of the originals of this verb. It was inflected as follows : — 328 English Language. steke(n); stale, stok; steken, stoken. This, which would strictly belong to Class V., had no original in Anglo-Saxon. 197. String is a verb that has apparently been formed from the noun 'string,' in Anglo-Saxon, streng. It does not appear to have been known before the sixteenth century, though it would be venturesome to assert that it had not a much earlier existence. If the verb is recent, as seems most probable, it is likely that from the beginning of its formation it was inflected string, strung, strung, according to the strong conju- gation, after the analogy of siving, swung; sting, stung; and others. 198. Of the verbs in the foregoing list, two — climb and help — have regularly gone over to the weak conjugation, and form the preterites and past partici- ples climbed and helped. Their strong forms are either archaic, poetic, or dialectic. The transition took place during the Middle English period. What, on the whole, were the common early strong forms for climb were as follows : — climbe(n); clamb, clombe(n); clumben. These are responsible for several of the forms still in use in dialects and among the uneducated. 199. Ding t a word but now little used, was not known to Anglo-Saxon at all, but in Early English appeared with the following inflection: — dinge(n); <-lang, dungen; dungen. Strong Verbs. — Class III. 329 It now follows usually the weak conjugation, but also exhibits the strong preterite and past participle dung. 200. The Early English inflection of run was as follows : — rinne(n) -i ran -> runnen •> runnen renne(n) / ' rem J ' ronnen i ronnen In the case of this verb the vowel of the preterite plural and past participle has made its way into the infinitive and present tense. This took place during the Middle English period. The preterite run was at one time found not unfrequently in literature, and is still in use among the uneducated (365). 201. The Anglo-Saxon strong verb winrfan, ' to move in a winding course,' has been transmitted in this sense to Modern English. But there is another English verb, wind, ' to sound by blowing,' derived from the noun ' wind.' This should strictly be in- flected according to the weak conjugation, and in certain senses is so. But the forms of the two verbs have to some extent acted upon each other. In consequence, the first has occasionally been inflected according to the weak conjugation ; but more often the second according to the strong. Thus, such a usage as " the way winded over the hill " can some- times be met with ; while the corresponding usage " he wound his horn " is even common. It is further to be added that in the sense just given, the derivative verb luind not only assumes at times the inflection of the strong verb, but invariably its pronunciation ; 330 English Language. whereas in other of its significations, as when we say "the horse is winded," the verb has not only the weak form invariably, but is pronounced not wind but wind. 202. There is one peculiarity that marks in partic- ular the verbs of this class. This is that in ordinary usage the original ending -en of the past participle has been dropped from all of them. It is true that in poetry, and in certain special phrases, bounden, drunken, shrunken, sunken, and foughten occasionally appear. But these, when found, have almost invariably lost the participial sense, and are simply adjectives. This is the only class of strong verbs which is characterized throughout by this peculiarity. Holpen, from help, would indeed be strictly an exception to this rule ; but here again the strong forms of this verb belong to poetry. 203. Another thing noticeable about this class is that with the exception of beornan, 'to burn,' — which had a peculiar history of its own, — not one of the verbs of the first subdivision (189) ever went entirely over to tin.' weak conjugation. On the other hand, all the verbs that survived of the other subdivisions did so with the exceptions of help and fight. The follow- ing are the verbs which in Modern English have aban- doned their strong forms : — I. bell, ' tn roar' (bellari). 5. yell (giellari). 2. delve (delfan). 6. yelp (gielpan ). 3- melt (nieltan). 7. yield (gieldan). 4- swell (nveUari). Strong Verbs. — Class IV. 331 8. bark (beorcan). II. smart {smeortan). 9. burn (beornari). 12. starve (steorfan). ID. carve (ceorfan). 13. swerve ? (szueorfan,' to polish'). 14. warp (weorpan). 15. braid (bregdan). 18. spurn (spurnan). 16. burst (berstan). 19. thresh (perscati). 17. mourn (////email). 204. One of these verbs, j/w//, still shows frequently the strong past participle swollen, but in general that form is used as an adjective. Bursten, carven, and molten are also adjectives which owe their existence to the original past participles of burst, carve, and melt, and at times are treated as participles in poetry. Starven, 'starved,' and yobten, 'yielded,' lasted down also to the beginning of the Modern English period. In truth, the forms of several of these verbs occasion- ally appear in the poetry of the early period of Modern English, not only because the language of poetry nat- urally preserves archaic forms, but because there was at that time a constant effort to revive forms gone out of ordinary use. For example, molt, an obsolete pret- erite, is used by Sackville in the following lines in the " Induction to the Mirror for Magistrates " : — My heart so molt to see his grief so great As feelingly, methought, it dropt away. STRONG VERBS. CLASS IV. 205. In Anglo-Saxon the vowel-variation was gen- erally according to the following scheme : — e ; ae, a? ; o. 332 Engl is Ii Language. This class contained in the early speech about ten verbs. The following survive : — I. bear, beran ; beer, b.eron ; boren. bear bore bom(e) 2. break, brecan; bra;c, brKCon ; brocen. break broke broke(n) 3- come, cuman ; com, comon ; cumen. come came come 4- shear, scieran ; scear, scearon ; scoren. shear shore shorn 5- steal, stelan ; steel, stelon ; stolen. steal stole stolen 6. tear, teran ; teer, tieron ; toren. tear lore torn 206. With the exception of c it man — which is pecul- iarly irregular — the short vowel of the infinitive and the present tense of all these verbs has been length- ened in their Modern English representatives. The Early English preterites were based upon their cor- responding Anglo-Saxon forms, and all exhibited the vowel (i. But during the Middle English period - and in the case of some verbs perhaps earlier — this vowel was displaced by the o of the past participle. Hence the earlier preterites bare, brake, s//ar(e), stair, and tare gave way to the forms now existing. But as certain of them — bare, brake, and tare par- ticularly — maintained themselves in literature, at the beginning of the Modern English period, alongside of bore, broke, and tore, they have never fallen into Strong Verbs. — Class IV. 333 absolute disuse. They are met with occasionally, particularly in poetry, and in any style intentionally made archaic. 207. The past participles of these verbs generally retain the final -n in Modern English. In colloquial usage, however, broke and stole are found alongside of broken and stolen, and these abbreviated forms have occasionally made their appearance in literature. 208. Come has differed from the other verbs of this class during the whole period of its history. The preterite com(e) was preserved in the South, but was early replaced by cam{e) in the North. This latter form made its way into the Midland. In the litera- ture of the beginning of the Middle English period it is found constantly in the Wycliffite version of the Scriptures, and not unfrequently in Chaucer, Gower, and Langland. After the fourteenth century it became the established form, though the older preterite come is still in use among the uneducated, and can some- times be found somewhat late in the literary speech. The past participle of this verb retained the final -;/ for a long period. Co men, in fact, did not die out till the seventeenth century. 209. Not one of these verbs has gone completely over to the weak conjugation. Shear has developed the weak preterite and participle, sheared; but the strong forms still survive. If sheared is more common in the preterite than shore, in the past participle shorn is more common than sheared. 210. In addition to the six original verbs of this 334 English Language. class that have survived, Modern English has received another. This is wear, which is derived from the Anglo-Saxon weak verb werian ; werede ; wered. Down to the fifteenth century certainly, and, perhaps, to the sixteenth, it was inflected as follows : — weren, werede, wered. So it always appears in Chaucer. But during the latter part of the Middle English period, it abandoned its strictly correct forms and replaced them by those of the strong conjugation, doubtless after the analogy of words like bear and tear. At the beginning of the Modern English period, it regularly presented the following as its principal parts : — 7. wear; ware or wore; worn. STRONG VERBS. — CLASS V. 211. This class is closely allied to the preceding, and is sometimes joined with it. The vowel-change is the same with the exception of the past participle, and is, in general, according to the following scheme : — c; se, ae; e. Four verbs, however, that have survived have i in the infinitive and present tense, and there are other variations the origin of which it is unnecessary to enter into here. 212. Nearly thirty verbs belonged to this class in Anglo Saxon. Of these the following survive : — Strong Verbs. — Class V. 335 I. bid, biddan; bred, bredon; beden. bid bad{e), bid bidden, bid 2. eat, etan; ret, reton; eten. eat ate, eat eaten, eat 3- get, gietan; get geat, got geaton; gieten. gotten, got 4- give, giefan; give geaf, gave geafon ; giefen. given 5- lie, began; lie keg. lay lregon; legen. lain 6. see, seon ; see seah, sazv sawon; sewen. seen 7- sit, sittan; sit sret, sat sreton ; seten. sat 8. speak, specan; 1 speak spree, spoke sprecon; specen. spoken 9- tread, tredan; trred, trredon; treden. tread trod(e) trodden :o. weave, wefan; ■weave wref, wove wrefon ; wefen. woven 213. In the history of these words it will be ob- served that the normal preterites gat, spake, trad, and waf have been displaced in Modern English by got, spoke, trod(e), and wove. The corresponding parti- ciples have also become gotten or got, spoken, trodden, and woven. In all these cases the forms with had made their appearance in the language as early as the fourteenth century. In the writings of that time even 3 oven is a past participle of 31've, 'give,' and sometimes 1 Specan is late Anglo-Saxon ; the earlier form was sprecan. 336 English Language. can be found as a preterite plural, though its use was not perpetuated in either case. 214. The origin of these forms is somewhat uncer- tain. It is probable that o was first introduced into the past participle after the analogy of the participles of the preceding class, with which this one is so closely connected. From the past participle these forms seem then to have made their way into the preterite. After the fourteenth century they became common, and were finally regarded as the standard forms. Still gat and spake have never died out, though they are now archaic. 215. Certain of the verbs of this class have had a somewhat peculiar history. The strong intransitive verb lie has been constantly confused through all the periods of Modern English with the weak transitive verb lay, and this error exhibits itself occasionally in literature. 1 The same is true, at least as regards the language of the uneducated, of the strong verb sit, which is frequently confounded with the weak verb set. More remarkable, perhaps, than either is see, which in the language of low life has the same form see as its preterite, instead of saw. This goes back to the 1 E.g. But let not a man trust his victorie over his nature too far re ; for nature will lay buried a great time, and yet revive upon the occasion of temptation. — Bacon, Essays {Of Nature in Man). Thou . . . send'st him shivering in thy playful spray And dashest him again to earth : — there let him lay. BYRON, Childe Harold, iv. st. 180. Strong Verbs. — Class V. 337 Middle English period, and may be much earlier. It has sometimes made its way into literature. 1 216. In the written language, the past participle usually retains the original final -//, and invariably so in the case of give, lie, and see. In colloquial speech this -n is sometimes dropped. The abbreviated participial forms bid, eat, spoke, trod, and wove have been used with varying degrees of frequency at different periods of Modern English • and, generally speaking, the shorter form got has been much more common, both in speech and in writing, than the fuller gotten. The opposite is the fact, however, in the case of the com- pound forget, where forgotten is preferred to forgot. The preterite has sometimes made its way into the past participle. Bade so used is not uncommon, and sat or sate is now the regular form for which sitten — analogous to bidden — was once employed. 217. Bid really represents two Anglo-Saxon strong verbs which have been hopelessly confused both as regards inflection and meaning. The forms here found are, on the whole, the nearest to biddan, which means ' to ask, invite, pray,' and in Early English would be represented by the following inflection : — bidde(n); bad, beden; beden. 1 This page ... of very speciall frendshippe se his tyme to set him forwarde. — Sir Thomas More, Richard HI., page 519. Who sec a master of mine? — GREENE, George-a- Greene, ed. 1 861, page 262. About noon set sail, in our way I see many barks and masts. — PEPYS'S Diary, April 8, 1660. Be sure you say you see him hurt himself. — PORTER, The Vil- lain, ed. 1670, page 67. 3 3 English Language. The other verb is beodan, which belongs to Class II. (185). It means 'to offer, announce, command,' and in Anglo-Saxon and Early English presents prop- erly the following forms : — beodan; bead, budon; boden. bede(n); lied, buden; boden. The forms of these verbs were early confounded with one another, and to a great extent used interchange- ably. Confusion of meaning naturally followed con- fusion of form. A striking result of this is seen in the compound forbid, which represents, so far as meaning is concerned, the Anglo-Saxon for-blodan, while its forms are mainly due to biddan. 218. Weave was at one period frequently inflected according to the weak conjugation, and even now it has at times the preterite and past participle weaved. On the other hand, to this class may be assigned the word spit, on the strength of an inflection it has occa- sionally had. Strictly it is a weak verb (274) and based upon a weak original ; yet during its history it has been sometimes inflected as follows : — 11. spit; spat; spitten. 219. To this class belong also two verbs, one of which was originally defective, the other has become so. The first of these is wesan, which has furnished the preterite of the substantive verb (442). The sec- ond had a full inflection in Anglo-Saxon. Its prin- cipal parts were as follows : — cwt'iian; cwcc'ii, cwanlon; cwedcn. Strong Verbs. — Class VI. # 339 In the fourteenth century it was rare that any other part of this verb beside the preterite was used ; but the preterite itself was then very common. By that time the forms with e, cwed and cweden, had been generally abandoned for those with 0. The verb then appeared indifferently with the consonant of the singular or of the plural, as quoth or quod; but the former became the prevalent form before the end of the Middle English period. The compound be-queathe has retained the full verbal inflection, but has passed entirely over to the weak conjugation. The same change characterizes fret, 'to chafe, dis- turb,' which is a compound of eat, and had for its first sense ' to devour.' The Anglo-Saxon verb is f retail ; and the old strong past participle fretten lasted down to the Modern English period. 220. The following verbs originally belonging to this class have gone over to the weak conjugation : — 1. fret (fretan). 4. be-queathe (de-nvefian). 2. knead (cnedan). 5. weigh (wegan). 3. mete (metan). 6. wreak (wrecari). STRONG VERKS. — CLASS VI. 221. In the verbs of this class the following is the regular variation of the radical vowel in Anglo-Saxon : — a; 5, 6; a. There were over thirty verbs belonging to this class in the early tongue. The following survive with the strong inflection : — 34Q English L a nguagc. I. draw, dragan; drog, drogon; dragen. draw drew drawn 2. heave, hebban; hof, hofon; hafen. heave hove hove 3- (for)sake, sacan ; soc, socon; sacen. -sake -sook -saken 4- shake, scacan ; scoc, scocon; scacen. shake shook shaken 5- slay, slean ; sloh, slogon; slagen. slay slew slain 6. stand, standan; stod, stodon; standen. stand stood stood 7- swear, swerian; swor, sworon ; sworen. swear swore sworn 8. take, tacan; toe, tocon; tacen. take took taken 9- wake, -wacan ; woe, wocon ; wacen. wake woke ivoke 222. To this class may be best referred two verbs which in Modern English are inflected according to the strong conjugation as well as the weak. They are the following : — 10. reeve; 11. stave; rove; stove; rove, stove. The first of these is a technical naval word. Its derivation is uncertain, and it probably belongs ex- clusively to Modern English. The second, slave, is pretty certainly a modern verb, and is doubtless formed directly from the substantive stave or staff. Before Strong Verbs. — Class VI. 341 the present century, certainly, the weak form staved was much more common than the corresponding form stove. 223. In a number of verbs of this class the preterite was used as the past participle in the early period of Modern English. Forsook, shook, and took, with its compounds mistook and undertook, were at one time very commonly used with have to form the perfect tense (314). In the case of stand this has become the established rule with the preterite stood, which has supplanted entirely the etymologically correct form stonden. It will be further noticed that this verb stand loses in the preterite its n. 224. A statement somewhat similar about the per- manent intrusion of the preterite into the past parti- ciple can be made of the verb ivake, which has lost its original past participle waken. The weak form waked is more common, however, in that part of the verb than the strong preterite form woke. But this is not true of the compound awake, in which the participle awoke, taken from the preterite, stands side by side in usage with awaked. In this verb the original parti- ciple awaken has disappeared from the inflection, and, with its final -n dropped, survives now only as an adjective. 225. In the case of two of these verbs, draw and slay, the original preterites droh, drow, and sloh, slow, have been replaced by forms with the vowel e. These made their appearance in the Old English period. It is hard to say what influences brought about this 342 English Language. change. In the case of draw, it may have been after the analogy of knaw, a common variant form of know. 226. The verb heave has the weak inflection as well as the strong. The weak forms showed them- selves indeed towards the end of the Anglo-Saxon period, and have been in constant use ever since. The preterite hove is more common than the past participle of the same form. Into the latter the vowel q of the former had early intruded, giving us hoven instead of haven. But to both, though more espe- cially to the past participle, the language, at least the literary language, prefers in most cases heaved. 227. Though a few verbs such as bide and gin are rarely to be met with in Modern English save as com- pounded, the word forsake — from for and saean, ' to contend,' — is the single instance of the preservation in our language of a compound in which the simple verb has perished entirely. 228. The verb swear of this class has been marked by certain irregularities which belonged to it from the earliest time. In particular, during the Middle Eng- lish period, it developed the preterite sware along with the regularly formed swore. This was probably done under the influence of the earlier preterites bare and tare of the fourth class (206). The preterite vware was once common, being in fact the only form found in our version of the Bible. It is still in ex- istence, though confined usually to poetry or to the designedly archaic style. Strong Verbs. — Class VI. 343 229. There is some doubt whether the simple verb tacan, ' to take,' existed in Anglo-Saxon, though verbs compounded of it are found. The same statement is true of wacan, though of this word the preterite ai*d past participle certainly occur. The modern wake has behind it both a strong and a weak verb, and it has had both strong and weak forms during the whole period of its history. But the latter have until lately been generally preferred. In fact, the strong form woke almost disappeared for several centuries from the language of literature, — so much so that it was not even recognized until lately in our dictionaries. It has now, however, become full as common as the weak form waked (247). 230. Most of the Anglo-Saxon verbs belonging to this class have been preserved in Modern English, though the large majority of them have gone over entirely or partially to the weak conjugation. The following is the list of these : — 1. ache (acatt). 9. laugh (hliehhan). 2. bake (bacaii). IO. scathe (scefiSan). 3. drag? (dragari), II. shape (scieppan). 4. fare (farcin). 12. shave (sea fa 11). 5. flay (Jieaii). 13. step (steppaii). 6. gnaw (gnagan). 14. wade (wadan). 7. grave (grafan). 15. wash (wascari). 8. lade (hladan). 16. wax (we axan) . Drag is particularly doubtful ; instead of being a variant of draw, it may have owed its origin to a Norse verb of the same meaning. 344 English Language. 231. A very marked peculiarity of all these verbs which have gone over to the weak conjugation is the extent to which they have retained their strong parti- cipial forms. Grave, lade, shape, and shave have still in good use the original participles graven, laden, shapen, and shaven. Shapen is, to be sure, somewhat archaic, and the same may be said of gnawn, which in the early period of Modern English occasionally appears. But even the obsolete or archaic participles baken, plain, washen, and waxen lasted down to a late period, usually, of course, in the sense of adjectives. 232. A variant form of lade is load, which had also the past participle loaden, now comparatively little used. Load may have come from the Anglo-Saxon verb of which lade is the modern representative, but it is more probably from the noun load, itself a derivative of the primitive verb. In the latter case, it would be pre- cisely like the verb loan derived from the noun spelled the same way, and thereby furnishing a variant form to lene, which, during the Middle English period, was corrupted into lend by the addition of a d. STRONG VKRBS. CLASS VII. 233. This includes the whole body of verbs still existing in Anglo-Saxon, which in the primitive Teu- tonic had been subject to reduplication (16). The number in our early speech was somewhat over fifty. In all of them the contraction of the reduplicating and radical syllables gave usually e or eo as the vowel to both numbers of the preterite (17). Strong; Verbs. — Class VII. 345 234. Of these fifty and more verbs the following still survive as members of the strong conjugation : — 1. beat, beatan; beot, beoton; beaten. beat beat beate>t, beat 2. blow (of blawan; bleow, bleowon; blawen. wind, etc.), blow blew blown 3. blow ('to blowan; bleow, bleowon; blowen. bloom'), blow blew blown crawan; creow, creowon; crawen. crow crew croived feallan; feoll, feollon; feallen. fall fell fallen growan; greow, greowon; growen. grow greiv grown hon; heng, hengon; hangen. liang hung hung healdan; heold, heoldon; healden. hold held held, holden 4. crow, 5. fall, 6. grow, 7. hang, 8. hold, 9. know, 10. throw, cnawan; cneow, cneowon; cnawen. know. knezo knoxvn hrawan; l>reow, breowon; hrawen. throw threw thrown 235. Blow, from blawan, has sometimes weak forms as well as the regular strong ones, though hardly in the language of literature. The preterite of blow, from blowan, ' to bloom,' is met with rarely. Crow has a weak preterite as well as a strong one, and in the past participle the weak c roamed has supplanted the etymo- logically correct crown. In the case of hold, the pret- erite has made its way into the past participle, though 346 English Language. the original form holden still survives, and in certain legal phrases is the one regularly employed. 236. Hang has a peculiar history of its own. In Anglo-Saxon, along with the strong verb Hon, there was a weak verb, hangian. In Early English the forms of these two were intermixed. The weak verb was adopted as the present and infinitive of both, and hon was consequently disused. The past participle of the strong verb, honge(n), originally hangen, made its way into the preterite, probably at first into the plural, and then into the singular. This did not take place early in the language of literature. Chaucer, for in- stance, still has the preterite heng. It was during the Middle English period that hung became the estab- lished form, displacing the still earlier hong. Attempts have been made in Modern English to make a distinc- tion between the use of the strong and the weak verb ; but so far none can be said to have established itself in the best usage, though there are certain expressions in which the employment of the one is generally pre- ferred to that of the other. 237. Of the verbs originally belonging to this class, the following have gone over to the weak conjuga- tion : — 1. ban (bannari). 6. glow (glowan). 2. claw (clawan). 7. hew (heawari). 3. dread (draidan). 8. liight (hatan). 4. flow (Jlowaii). 9. leap (hteapari). 5. fold {fealdan). 10. let {latan). Strong Verbs. — Class I "II. 347 11. low {hlowan). 17. sow (sawan). 12. mow (jnawan). 18. span (s/a/ntan). 13. root (of swine) [wrotan). 19. swoop (sTvapan ) . 14. row (rozvati). 20. walk (jvealcati). 15. shed {sceadati). 21. weep (zvepari). 16. sleep (s/ibpan). 22. wheeze (hwesan). To these may be added the two following words, obsolete in the standard literary speech, but frequently appearing in imitations of the archaic style : — rede, from radan, 'to advise.' greet, from gratan, ' to mourn.' 238. All these verbs had exhibited weak forms at the beginning of the Middle English period, though the strong forms of many of them were still in existence, especially the form of the past participle. This three of them still continue to retain. Hew, mow, and sow have the strong participles hewn, mown, and sown as well as hewed, mowed, and sowed. In some of the English dialects, indeed, the original strong preterites mew and sew survive for mowed and sowed. Flow also shows occasionally the past par- ticiple flown in Modern English, though almost exclu- sively in phrases founded upon Milton's use of the word in a famous passage. 1 239. The verb hight, ' to call,' or ' to be called,' 1 When night Darkens the streets, then wander forth the sons Of Belial, flown with insolence and wine. Paradise Lost, I., line 502. 34-S English Language. has now hardly any existence outside of poetry or pieces written in the serio-comic style. It is etymo- logically only a preterite. The forms of the verbs in Anglo-Saxon were : — hatan; heht or het, hehton or heton; haten. In Early English this verb appeared with a great variety of forms, of which the. following may serve as examples : — haten -v hihte -k hoten -k heten \ ; hi^t >■ ; het >• . hoten J hyghte ) hyghtJ The preterite hight, frequently found with the end- ing -e, and perhaps considered in consequence a weak verb, made its way into the past participle and the present tense. This led gradually to the abandon- ment of the other forms, and by the end of the Middle English period hight had come to represent all parts of the verb which were then used. It ex- tended even to the passive. The Anglo-Saxon imtte, 1 1 am called,' ' I was called,' was first represented in Early English by hatte and hette ; but these forms also were abandoned for hight. The passive use still continues to some extent in Modern English, as, for example, in the following lines : — The one Abydos, the other Sestos hight. Marlowe, Hero and Leander, ist sestiad. Father he hight and he was in the parish. Longfellow, Children of the Lord's Supper, line 48. The Stro)ig Conjugation. 349 240. This completes the survey of the strong verbs still existing in English. We are now in a position to summarize the results of the examination that has been made, and to bring together under one view the scattered facts which have been recounted in the dis- cussion of the several conjugations. It is, of course, to be borne in mind that in all statements of numbers which follow, the same rule prevails in Modern Eng- lish as in Anglo-Saxon. It is the simple verbs alone that are taken into consideration, never the com- pound, unless express mention is made to that effect. With this proviso against misunderstanding, we are enabled to make safely certain general statements. 241. The first is that Modern English retains pre- cisely seventy-eight of the three hundred strong verbs, more or less, which are to be found in Anglo-Saxon. Again, of these three hundred about eighty- eight others still exist in the language, but have gone over to the weak conjugation. This latter number cannot be stated with absolute accuracy. In the case of a few of the verbs, included in the lists of those which have passed from the strong conjugation to the weak, there is some doubt as to their originals belonging to the former. As a result of farther investigation, there- fore, some may have to be taken from the number just given, or some may even have to be added to it. Still the list will not vary materially from what has already been set down. Accordingly, assuming eighty- eight as a number not far out of the way, it follows that over one hundred and thirty strong verbs, once 350 English Language. belonging to the language, have disappeared from it entirely. Some of these were obsolescent, or, per- haps, obsolete in later Anglo-Saxon, and cannot fairly be reckoned among the losses of our speech after the Conquest. Of those, however, that were in common use during the earliest period, and have since been dropped, the places have, in the majority of instances, been taken by verbs derived from the Norman- French. 242. The second statement is, that of the seventy- eight existing strong verbs which have come down to us from Anglo-Saxon verbs of the same conjugation, fourteen have either developed weak forms also, or possess weak forms which may be due to a weak Anglo-Saxon verb that stood alongside of the cor- responding strong one. Hence they may be said to belong to both conjugations. These are the following, arranged under their respective classes : — I. IV. abide. shear. cleave, 'to adhere.' shine. v. shrive. weave II. VI. cleave, ' to split.' heave. seethe. wake. ill. VII. climb. crow. help. hang. The Strong Conjugation. 3 5 1 Moreover, of these fourteen the strong forms of four — cleave, 'to adhere,' seethe, climb, and help — -belong to the language of poetry rather than of prose. In the case of two others — shear and heave — the weak form is, on the whole, more common in the preterite of the first and in the participle of the second. 243. The third statement is, that to these seventy- eight verbs which have exhibited strong forms during all periods of our speech, there have been added, in the course of its history, thirteen others. These are chide, hide, strive, and thrive, which can be assigned to Class I. ; fling, ring, dig, stick, and string, to Class III. ; wear, to Class IV. ; spit, to Class V. ; and reeve and stave, to Class VI. Furthermore, as regards origin, seven of these thirteen — chide, hide, ring, dig, stick, wear, and spit — have been derived from verbs of the Anglo-Saxon weak conjugation ; two — thrive and fling — have come into the language from the Old Norse ; and one, strive, from the Old French. The remaining three are either of uncertain etymology or have sprung from nouns. Furthermore, six of these thirteen — chide, strive, thrive, spit, reeve, and stave — have also forms of the weak conjugation in use. The same is true, though not to so marked a degree, of dig. 244. The fourth statement is, that with the verbs directly descended from Anglo-Saxon primitives, and with those derived from other sources, there are at present in the language seventy-one verbs which be- long exclusively to the strong conjugation ; and twenty which form their principal parts sometimes according 35 2 Engl is Ji Language. to it and sometimes according to the weak conjugation. This would make ninety-one verbs now existing in our tongue which exhibit, either invariably or occa- sionally, the strong inflection. 245. As applied to the present speech, the foregoing statements are sufficiently accurate. At the same time, it must not be forgotten that great variations exist in the good usage of even the same period, and very great variations in the good usage of different periods. All general assertions are therefore liable to meet with specific exceptions. What would be regarded as cor- rect at one time is treated as incorrect at another. Coined for came is met with frequently in the writings of the Elizabethan age. Wallis, the noted grammarian of the seventeenth century, whose work first came out in 1652, inserts in it the weak forms beared, choosed, drawed, spinned, swimmed, and throw.ed, along with bore, chose, drew, spun, swum, and threw. Though such weak forms could not have been common among the educated, it seems unreasonable to suppose that they were not employed by them at all. Furthermore, both Ben Jonson and Wallis introduced snow, snew, and siii'7^/1 as a regular inflection of snow, though these strong forms are certainly rare in literature, if even known to it at all. 1 246. There has, however, been an occasional ten- dency on the part of weak verbs to pass over to the 1 It is, perhaps, possible that this was a misprint in Ben Jon- son's Grammar oi tAow, shew, shown, and that it was copied on his authority by Wallis. The Strong Conjugation. 353 strong conjugation ; and in the case of three, a strong passive participle has been added to their inflection. They are the following : — , , . showed, ) 1. show, showed, , >• shown. ) strewed, ) 2. strew, strewed, > strewn. • sawed, "I 3. saw, sawed, > sawn. ) The first of these is derived from the Anglo-Saxon weak verb sceawian, sceawode ; the second, which is often written and oftener pronounced as strow, is from the Anglo-Saxon weak verb streawian, streawode. It was in the Middle English period that the strong parti- cipial forms of these two words came into use along- side of the weak ones ; and, as in like instances, the analogy of verbs like know, blow, grow, and others, had the most powerful influence in their production and wide employment. But the strong forms never extended beyond the past participle, though the strong preterite shew for showed early established itself in the provincial dialects, and has never died out. Saw, as a verb, does not apparently go back to an early period. It was doubtless derived from the noun spelled in the same way, and its strong past participle seems to have been developed first in Modern English. 247. One further point needs to be brought out before concluding the examination of the changes that have gone on in the strong conjugation. No verb 354 English Language. which reached the beginning of the Modern English period with strong forms in common use ever let the strong forms go out of common use. There are verbs such as climb and help which now belong regularly to the weak conjugation, though they are occasionally inflected according to the strong. But this was as true of them in the sixteenth century as it is now. 1 We are consequently enabled to say, that since the reign of Queen Elizabeth (1558-1603), our speech has not lost a single strong verb. What the language then had it has ever since retained. Nor does it manifest the least disposition to abandon any it now has. True, there have been periods in which weak preterites and past participles, like choosed, Mowed, freezed, weaved, and numerous others, occur to a greater or less extent, and at times have found favor with some grammarians. Hut their employment has never broadened and per- petuated itself. In fact, the present disposition of the language is not only to cling firmly to the strong verbs it already possesses, but to strengthen their hold, and even to extend their number whenever possible. Forms once common, and in the best usage, such as shaked, shined, strived, and thrived, are either now much rarer than shook, shone, strove, and throve, or else arc not met with at all. Woke, though not found in Shakspeare, Milton, and the English Bible, has be- come, during the last century, full as common as waked as the preterite of wake; while dug may be said to have supplanted digged, the regular preterite, 1 See page 155. , The Weak Conjugation. 355 not only of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, but of all preceding periods. 248. So decided, in truth, is the disposition the lan- guage now displays to prefer the strong forms, that it is not impossible that some verbs now inflected weak will return to their oil conjugation, or that others which are strictly weak will pass over to the strong. Atten- tion has already been called to the inflection of dive (188). Cases of this kind may be always expected to occur. The English dialects also have retained the strong form in some cases where the literary language has assumed the weak, and at any moment the original inflection may be taken up by the latter from the former. These dialects, indeed, have often developed strong forms in verbs that are strictly weak, as has already been seen in the case of show, sliew, which is found both in England and this country. So, also, squeeze has a strong preterite squoze in the dialects of some parts of England ; and this can be heard, like- wise, in various parts of the United States in the speech of the uneducated. Sporadic forms like these crop up here and there constantly in our literature ; and their occurrence renders it unsafe to assert that particular inflections are never employed. It can only be said that they are not the ones usually employed. The Weak Conjugation. 249. It has already been pointed out that the dis- tinguishing characteristic of the weak conjugation is, that it now adds, or originally added, a syllable to form 356 English Language. the preterite ; and that this syllable was, according to a generally received theory, nothing more than a verbal form corresponding to the reduplicated pret- erite of the English verb do. This supposed ancient form may be best explained by the following hypo- thetical account of its origin. Instead of employing an expression equivalent to / did love, the preterite was denoted by an expression equivalent to love-did- I ; and this appended verb was so cut down, and so closely united with the leading verb, that only traces of it were left. It was only in the dual and plural numbers of the Gothic preterite that its full form was seen. In Anglo-Saxon all that remained of it in the first person of the preterite singular was -de. For instance, hedan, ' to heed,' had for its past tense l/edde, ' heeded.' In general terms it may be said that the Anglo-Saxon weak verb formed its preterite by adding -de, or, in certain circumstances, -te. 250. Its passive participle was also distinguished from that of the strong conjugation by the fact that the latter ended in -en ; while in the former the termi- nation was -d, or occasionally -/. 251. Furthermore, the Teutonic weak verb was divided into three conjugations, according to the character of the connective which entered between the stem and the termination. All of these three are preserved in Gothic and Old High German. But in the other early Teutonic tongues the third of the conju- gations above mentioned, the one with the connective at, had practically disappeared. The verbs originally The Weak Conjugation. 357 belonging to it had largely gone over to the second con- jugation, and the few which survived had intermixed forms derived from both the second and the first. 252. The other two conjugations were both flour- ishing during the earliest period. The original con- nective in the first class had in Anglo-Saxon become e, in the second it had become 0; and hence the termination added to the stem was in one case -ede, in the other -ode. But a further modification of the inflection took place in the former class. AY hen the stem of a verb of the first conjugation was long, the connective e was dropped in the preterite. For illus- tration, hyr-an, ' to hear,' with its long stem hyr, formed the preterite hyr-de, ' heard,' not hyr-e-de. 253. In the English of the Anglo-Saxon period, consequently, there may be said to be two conjuga- tions of the weak verb, — one forming the preterite by adding -de, or -ede, to the stem, the other by add- ing -ode. There were phonetic influences at work which, under certain conditions, changed or modified the character of the terminations, as will be seen farther on, but those just given may be regarded as the strictly normal endings. The following examples will illustrate the differences between them : — dem-an, deem fyll-an, Jill dem-de. fyl-de. f L er-ia-n, plough er-e-de J trymm-an, strengthen J trym-e-de. loc-ia-n, look ~\ 16c-o-de. wun-ia-n, dwell > wun-o-de. 358 English Language. 254. These represent the two early weak conjuga- tions as distinguished from each other in the preterite. But within certainly a century and a half after the Norman Conquest the distinction had disappeared. The connective of the second conjugation was gen- erally weakened to e, although it is occasionally found even as late as the end of the thirteenth century, and perhaps still later. A necessary result of this was, that verbs of the original Anglo-Saxon second conjugation formed their preterites precisely like short-stemmed verbs of the first conjugation, both having the connec- tive e. Thus, in the case of the preterites of the two verbs of that conjugation just given, locode was in Early English represented by lokede, and wunode by wonede. 255. To this same practice conformed, in the latter part of the Old English period, and still more in the Middle English period, many, and perhaps most, of the long-stemmed verbs of the first conjugation. To use the preceding examples, the preterite demde be- came demede ; the preterite fylde became both filde and fittede, with an increasing tendency, after the beginning of the Middle English period, to employ the fuller form. During that period, consequently, the connective e had become the general connective of the weak preterite. This it lias always since remained. There were, and still are, many exceptions to this rule ; but, as a general statement, it is sufficiently accurate. 256. It may therefore be said that -ede in the Old English period was added to the stem of weak verbs The Weak Conjugation. 359 to form the preterite. Thus the past tense of look was written and pronounced lookede. But in the fourteenth century certainly, and perhaps earlier, the -e final of -ede began to disappear from pronunciation, and in the fifteenth century the practice became gen- eral not to sound it. At the beginning of Modern English it had disappeared entirely. Its disuse in pronunciation led, likewise, to its disuse in writing or printing ; lookede, to continue the same illustration, became looked. This left -ed as the addition with which to form the preterite in Modern English. It was also attended by another consequence. As the past participle usually ended in -ed, the dropping of the final -e of the preterite was followed necessarily by the result that the forms for the preterite and the past participle became the same. 257. But the modification of the preterite did not stop here. At the beginning of the Modern English period the connective e of the preterite ending -ed — and the statement is likewise true of the past participle — began to be dropped in pronunciation. During the sixteenth century, and perhaps even later, usage seems to have varied on this point. In some words, or by some persons, the -ed was pronounced as a distinct syllable ; and in other words, or by other persons, the e was not sounded, and the -d was joined directly in pronunciation to the preceding syllable, where it necessarily had often the sound of /. Lookiil of Middle English came, in consequence, in Modern English, to have the sound of lookt. 360 English Language. 258. The process by which this result was reached was unquestionably a gradual one. The hurried speech of ordinary colloquial intercourse was necessarily the first to adopt it, and from that it made its way into general use. The poetry of the end of the sixteenth century shows that the dropping of the e of -ed in pronunciation had become widespread, and almost as universal as it is in the nineteenth. On this point the spelling is now of little or no service ; for, in writing or print, the full orthographic form is, in the large majority of instances, retained. At the present time the -ed is rarely heard as a distinct syllable, save in verbs ending in -d or -/, as dread, dreaded, wet, wetted; and in certain participles used as adjectives, such as aged and learned, to distinguish them from the same words when used strictly as participles. The dropping of the e in some cases, however, caused a change of pronunciation, which, in return, reacted upon the spelling of the preterite ; but tins will be considered later (265). 259. The termination of the regular preterite of the weak verb can, therefore, be described as having passed through the following changes : At the outset, it was -de, -ede, or -ode. All these were represented in Old English generally by -ede, and occasionally by -de simply. Ede, however, increased steadily in use during the Middle English period, but during that same period dropped its final -e. This left -ed to be transmitted to Modern English as the normal termina- tion of the preterite, though in the case of verbs ending Irregular Weak Verbs. 361 with the unsounded final -e, such as love, hate, the vowel was not doubled. This statement is neces- sarily true only of the present spelling, not, as we have just seen, of the present pronunciation. We add -ed in writing ; in speaking we usually add only -d, or sometimes -/. We write thanked, for instance ; we give it the sound of thankt. 260. In the following scheme the variations in form and pronunciation which have marked the history of the verbs deem, fill, and look in their transition from Anglo-Saxon through Old English and Middle Eng- lish to Modern English, will indicate the nature of the changes that have taken place in the regular verb of the weak conjugation : — deman, demde; demde; demede; deemed (flron. deemd). fyllan, fylde; filde; fillede; filled (pron. fild). locian, locode; lokede; lookede; looked (proii. lookt). 261. So much for the strictly regular forms. We come now to the consideration of the IRREGULAR VERBS OF THE WEAK CONJUGATION, and of the causes which have led to the variations of form that now exist. These verbs may be divided into the two following classes : — 1. Verbs in which the vowel of the stem remains the same throughout, and the variations which occur affect only the terminations. 2. Verbs in which the vowel of the stem undergoes variation. 362 English Language. 262. In discussing the verbs of the first class, it is to be remarked at the outset that, even in Anglo- Saxon, the termination of the preterite was subjected to that same modification, which has been widely ex- tended in Modern English. From it have sprung, in consequence, a number of peculiar forms different from those of the regular inflection. As the connec- tive ia weakened to c was dropped in the majority of verbs of the first weak conjugation, the result was, that -de was added directly to the stem, as in the preterites demde and fylde given above (253). The effect of this was, in some cases, to change the pronunciation. The spelling conforming to the sound, d after certain consonants became /; and -tc was the syllable added, and not -de. 263. In Anglo-Saxon, this was regularly the case when the stem of the verb ended in c, p, t, x, and sometimes in s, as will be seen by the following ex- amples, in which the past participles are given as well as the preterites. It will be noticed that c final of the root passes, in the preterite, into h : — Infinitives. Preterites. Past Participles. secan, seek, sohte, soht. 1 epan, keep, cepte, ceped. cyssan, kiss, cyste, cyssed. gretan, greet, grette, greted. lixan, shine, lixte, lixed. 264. In Early English some of these verbs occa- sionally resumed the connective c before the ending Irregular Weak Verbs. 363 of the preterite. In that case the regular termination -de was employed, instead of -te. Thus, the past tenses of eepan and cyssan, given above, became in later English, according to the pronunciation, either kepte and kiste, or kepede and kissede. There was a natural tendency to extend to all verbs a termination which was given to the vast majority. This, to a cer- tain extent, diminished the number of those which, in Anglo-Saxon, had formed the preterite by adding -te. When, in later English, the final -e of this ending -ede dropped from the spelling, and the connective e from the pronunciation, change was rarely made in the orthography to indicate the change of sound. We retain the spelling of one form and the pronunciation of the other, as has been pointed out in the instances of looked and thanked (257, 259). These are types of a large number of words now existing in our speech. 265. It was not always the case, however, that the form which represented the actual pronunciation was rejected entirely. In some instances it continued in use, though rarely in exclusive use. The consequence is, that in Modern English, a number of double forms for the preterite and past participle are employed, differing from each other, in some cases, only in spelling, and not at all in pronunciation ; or, if ever differing in pronunciation, they differ only in the sound of final -d or -t. They usually occur in words ending in /, //, 11, f>, s/i, or in those ending in the sound of s. The following list will furnish some of the more common examples : — 364 spell, pen, learn, dip, English Language. fix, spoil, bless, spelled, -j spelt. J penned, -k pent. J learned, -> learnt, J clipped, -. dipt. J curse, fixed, fixt. spoiled, spoilt. blessed, blest. cursed, curst. 266. There are many double forms, like these, to be found at various periods in our literature ; but in earlier times they usually represented actual differ- ence of pronunciation. Thus Spenser, for instance, indicated as a rule the sound of the termination by its spelling. We find, for example, in the first canto of the first book of "The Faerie Queene," the preterites advaunst, approcht, cald, chaunst, displaid, enhaunst, expeld, font, gazd, glaunst, knock t, mournd, perceivd, playnd, pusht, raizd, retournd or returnd, seemd, stopt and strowd ; and also the past participles benumb J, com pcld, dazd, dismayd, drownd, enforst, ravisht, re- soled, x- rock?, stretcht, subdewd, tost, and vanquisht. There can be found, it is true, the present way of indi- cating the fact that the e of the termination is not to be pronounced, by the insertion of the apostrophe in its place. Still this method does not occur in half a dozen instances. It is only when the ending consti- tutes a distini t syllable in pronunciation that we find the full form written by Spenser, as in seemed, drowned, ;ind forced in this same canto. With us -d is no longer Irregular Weak Verbs. 365 added directly to the stem, except in a few cases to be considered later. The adding of -t is more common ; but in general it may be said of this ending that it is found much oftener in the early literature of Modern English than in that of the present time. 267. A series of forms, allied to these, though of a somewhat different origin, comes now to be considered. In Anglo-Saxon, verbal stems ending in -d or -/, pre- ceded by a consonant, usually dropped the final letter of the stem in the preterite. The conjugation of the verbs from which send and gird have been derived will show the original forms : — sendan, sende, sended gyrdan, gyrde, gyrded. Occasionally in the Anglo-Saxon period, forms with t instead of d showed themselves in certain of these verbs ; and there was even then a disposition to drop the -ed of the participle. In Early English the ten- dency to employ / for d became more pronounced. The termination -te accordingly took its place beside -de in many of these verbs, and was often far more common in some of them. Their introduction into the preterite may have been largely aided by their adoption into the past participle, where in many cases, certainly, they were at first more frequently found. 268. Here, again, the same course of proceeding took place as in the verbs whose history has just been given. After the contracted forms for the preterite 366 English Language. and past participle had become established, new and strictly regular forms were often developed by the adding of -ed. These have become the ones generally found in Modern English. Still some of these verbs with contract forms continue to survive in the lan- guage. They are included in the following list : — I. lend, lent. 4- spend, spent. 2. rend, rent. 5- (wend, went) 3- send, sent. Of these rend has occasionally the full form vended ; while went has become the preterite of the verb go, and wend has developed, to take its place, the regular form wended (435). 269. Some of these verbs, however, are still found with full and contracted forms of the preterite and past participle existing side by side. Usage varies in the case of each, one form being more common in some verbs, the other more common in others. The following is the list : — '» 1. bend, 2. blend, bended, -1 gelded, ^ bent. / gelt. J blended, ^ . gilded, -> blent. / 5 ' g "' gilt. J builded, ) girded, •> 3. build, 6. gird, . \ built. ) girt. J These are to be distinguished from such preterites as /earned and learnt, dwelled and d7celt, mixed and mixt, passed and past (265) ; for in these latter, while there Irregular Weak Verbs. 367 is an actual difference in the spelling, there is usually no additional syllable heard in the pronunciation of the fuller form. 270. These verbs, it will be observed, have pre- served a distinct form for the preterite and past par- ticiple either by changing -d into -/, or by adding, so as to form a distinct syllable, the ending -ed which had then come to be the one regularly employed. This latter was the method usually resorted to, even in the case of verbs ending in -d or -/. Thus the Early English dreden had a preterite dredde, and greten had the preterite grette. When the final -e ceased to be pronounced, the place of -de and -te was taken in both instances by the regular ending -ed. The Mod- ern English forms are accordingly dreaded and greeted. But this change did not invariably occur. We come, in consequence, to the consideration of a class of verbs which dropped the termination of the preterite and past participle altogether. This, with the losses which took place in other parts of the verb, had the effect of making all the principal parts exactly alike in form. 271. To illustrate the precise history of these verbs, let us take two — sprcedan, ' to spread,' and settan, ' to set.' The following are the principal parts in Anglo- Saxon : — Infinitive. Preterite. Past Participle. spraklan, sprsedde, sprawled. seted 1 settan, sette, >. set(t) i 368 English Language. The infinitives of these two verbs became in Old Eng- lish spreden and seiten, and, with the disappearance of the final -;/, sprede and scttc. With these latter agreed, as usual, the forms for the first person of the present tense. The past participle also dropped gen- erally its ending. It had shown, even in the Anglo- Saxon period, a decided leaning towards contraction, as witness above in the case of set(t), found alongside of seted. This now became the rule in verbs of this kind. Accordingly, during the Early English period these verbs presented ordinarily the following inflec- tion : — sprede, spredde, spred. sette, sette, set. 272. During the fifteenth century the final -e disap- peared from these forms in writing, as a result of its disappearance from pronunciation. In consequence, the second d or /, whenever it would have been left in the inflection, was dropped as unnecessary. The re- sult accordingly was that the forms for the infinitive and the present, the preterite and the past participle, came to be precisely alike ; and these verbs entered Modern English with the following inflection, which they still retain : — spread, spread, spread, set, set, set. What is true of these is true of several other Anglo- Saxon verbs, whose principal parts have come to pre- sent no change of form in Modern English. Irregular Weak Verbs. 369 273. But the tendency to bring about this result was not limited to native verbs. Words were brought also into this class which did not belong to the Anglo- Saxon, but came from the Norse or the Norman- French. Even words which in Anglo-Saxon added -ode to form the preterite, and not simply -de, were sometimes made to conform to this inflection. It was inevitable, however, after verbs had thus been stripped of their original endings, and had been reduced to one unvarying form in their principal parts, that a reaction should set in. In some instances this has been wholly successful. The verb has become strictly regular. In other cases, contract and full forms of the preterite came into use, and have since been re- tained side by side. In certain instances the contract forms have become the exclusive ones. The general present practice of the language in regard to these latter will now be exhibited. In those derived from the Anglo-Saxon, the principal parts as found in that period, in the Early English period, and in the Modern English period, will be given in each case. 274. The following are the verbs that belonged to the weak conjugation in the original tongue. In the case of a few of them certain of the principal parts are theoretical, especially the past participles : — 1. hreddan, hredde, hreded redde(n) •> ridde (n) ' redde -| ridde i red 1 rid r rid, rid, rid. 370 English Language. 2. settan, sette(n), sette, sette, seted ) set(t) J set. set, set, set. 3- scyttan, schutte(n) "1 schette(n) > scytte, schutte 1 schette / ' scyted. schut ) schet / shut, shut, shut. 4- spittan, spitte(n), spitte, spitte, spited, spit. spit, spit, spit. 5- spnedan, sprede(n), spread, spraedde, spredde, spread, sprseded spred. spread. 275. The following verbs of this class originally belonged to the Anglo-Saxon strong conjugation; hence only the Early English forms nearest to the modern forms are given : — 6. berste(n), berst, //. burster), hurste hurst, burst, burst. 7- lete(n), let \ lette J : i leten. let, let, let. 8. scheden, schedde, sched shed, shed, shed. 9. I light. (See Section 239.) Burst has developed also a regular preterite and past participle burs ted, which in the language of slang is frequently corrupted into " busted." Irregular Weak Verbs. 371 276. The following verbs of this class came into the language from the Old Norse : — 10. caste (n), caste, cast. cast, cast, cast. II. cutte(n), cutte, cut. cut, cut, cut. 12. hitte (n), hitte, hit. hit, hit, hit. 13- putte(n), putte, put. put, put, put. To this list may be added the word 14. ' stead,' and its compound ' bestead.' Both of these were apparently little used till towards the beginning of Modern English, and indeed have never been common at any time. Here, also, prob- ably belongs 15. thrust, thrust, thrust. There is a Middle English thresten, from the Anglo- Saxon forces fia??, 'to twist'; but the Modern English verb probably comes from the Norse. 277. To the Old French we owe the two following verbs of this class : — costed \ costed \ coste i ' cost > cost, cost. hurte, hurt. hurt, hurt. 16. coste (n), cost, '7- hurten, hurt, 37 2 English Language. 278. These seventeen verbs undergo now no change of form, though several of them occasionally exhibited full forms in the earlier speech. This inflection in some cases lasted down to the beginning of Modern English. Cutted and spitted, for example, can be found in the Middle English period, and the past participle casted, though used as an adjective, occurs in Shakspeare. 1 But there are a number of these verbs which, by the beginning of the Modern English period, had usually developed full regular forms along- side of the contract ones, and both have continued in use to the present time. Most of them belonged to the Anglo-Saxon weak conjugation ; but of those in the following list that do not, slit is from the Anglo-Saxon strong conjugation, and quit comes from the Old French. Of the remaining two, split apparently did not make its entry into the language till about the sixteenth century, though on this point there is no certainty. It is possibly of Scandinavian origin. The second one, bet, is even of later origin, and its ety- mology is doubtful. 279. In the following list are comprised verbs which have full regular forms for the preterite and past participle, along with those in which the principal parts are the same throughout : — I. cnyttan, cnytte, cnyted. knitte(n), knitte, knitted ") knit > knit, knit ") knitted > ' knit \ knitted < 1 lltitry I '., act iv. scene 1. Irregular Weak Verbs. 373 2 swaetan, swete(n), swrette, swette, swatted, swet. sweat, sweat sweated }■ sweat sweated 3- waiJtan, wete(n), wiette, wette, waited, wet. wet, wet wetted }• wet wetted 4- i hwettan, whette(n), h wette, whette, hweted. whet. whet, whetted whet }• whetted whet 5- screadian, schrede(n), shred, screadode, schredde, shred 1 shredded / ' screadod schred. shred shredded 6. slitten, slitte, slit. slit, slit slitted }■ slit slitted 7- quite(n), quit, quitte, quitted quit }• quit. quitted quit 8. split, split splitted }• split splitted 9- bet, bet betted 1 r bet betted 280. To this list may be added the somewhat rare verb 10. wont, wonted wont wonted wont 374 English Language. This verb is derived from the past participle of the verb won, ' to dwell,' which is now obsolete, though occasionally appearing in poetry- 1 The original in- flections were as follows : — wunian, wunode, wunod. wonie(n), wonede, wont. The past participle wont used as a present developed its preterite wonted as early as the sixteenth century. The verb is still in use, though it cannot be called common. 281. In this list of ten verbs with double preterites and participles it is largely a matter of individual pref- erence which of the two shall be adopted. The number, indeed, might be somewhat extended, if the various forms that have appeared at various times in the writings of good authors were to be included. The contracted form wed for wedded, especially in the past participle, is not infrequent. In the first period of Modern English, lift for lifted \s sometimes met with, 2 and other unusual forms, either full or contract, are occasionally to be found in our literature. Plight for plighted would be an illustration. In the principal 1 Out of the ground uprose, As from his lair, the wild beast, where he worn In forest wild, in thicket, brake, or den. MILTON, Paradise Lost, VII., 457. - Lift, as the preterite, LODGE and GREENE'S Looking- Glass fir London inGREl NE'S Works, ed. of 1861, page 123; as a past participle in MARLOWE'S Tamburlaine /., act ii. scene 1; Peele'S David and Bethsabe, ed. of 1861, page 468 ; CARTWRIGHT'S Lady Errant, art i. scene 2; Shadwell's Libertine, act i. Irregular Weak Verbs. 375 " light i fit, lit. 378 Engl is Ji Language. and the other ' to alight.' Though different in origin, they have nearly the same inflections. The con- tracted forms are much more common with the modern verb derived from the first than with the one derived from the second. In the present literary use lit is almost entirely confined to light in the sense of ' to illuminate,' though in colloquial speech it is sometimes used with the other. Plead is from the Old French, and the preterite plead is far less com- mon in the literary language than pleaded, though /// is perhaps as common as lighted. It is also to be added that betide sometimes exhibits the full regular form bedded, and that speed also in certain senses has speeded. 287. The second group of verbs whose stems have come to be shortened in the preterite and past parti- ciple (283) embraces all those words which end in other letters than -d 'or -/. They are nineteen in number, and nearly one-half of them belonged to the strong conju- gation in Anglo-Saxon. The first list will include those which have been weak verbs through all periods of their history. 1. dielan, dele(n), deal, 2. dreman, dreme(n), dream, dselde, dseled. delede }■ deled 1 delt J delte dealt, dealt. dremde, dremed. dremede }■ dremed. dremde dreamt, dreamt. Irregular Weak Verbs }■ 379 3- felan, felde, fele(n), felede felte feel, felt, 4- hyran, hyrde, here(n), herde, hear, heard, 5- cepan, cepte, kepe(n), kepte, keep, kept, 6. hlinian, hlinode, lene(n), lenede, lean, leant, 7- lrcfan, la-fde, leve(n), levede lefte leave, left, 8. maenan, msende, mene(n), mende, mean, meant, 9- reafian, reafode, reve(n), revede refte (be) reave, reft, :o. sceoian, scode, shoe(n), shode, shoe, shod, }. feled. feled. felt. hyred. herd. heard. ceped. kept. kept. hlinod. (lened). leant. l^fed. .leved \ left J left. msened. mened ) ment J meant. reafod. reved "I reved "I i' reft J" ret reft. scod. shod, shod. To these may be added the forms of kneel and sweep of which the Anglo-Saxon originals are doubtful : — 3 8o EnglisJi L a nguagi : ii. knele(n), knelede, kneled. kneel, knelt, knelt. 12. swepe(n), swepede, sweped. sweep, swept, swept. 13. cleve(n) (II.), clevede, cleave, cleft, 14. crepe(n) (II.), crepede }. 288. From the strong conjugation in Anglo-Saxon the following anomalous verbs of the weak conjuga- tion have been derived. The Roman numerals indi- cate the class to which they originally belonged : — cleved ) cleft J cleft. crepid \ crept i crept. fled, fled. leped ) lept / leapt. lost, lost. slept. slept. weped 1 wept > wept. creep, 15. fle(n) (II.), flee, 16. lepe(n) (VII.), leap, 17. lose(n) (II.), lose, 18. slepe(n) (VII.), sleep, 19. wepe(n) (VII.), weep, crepte crept, fledde, fled, lepede 1 lepte i leapt, loste, lost, slepte, slept, wepede \ wepte i wept, To the verbs of this list the strong verb shoot (180) has become so thoroughly assimilated that with the Irregular Weak Verbs. 381 practical disappearance of its past participle shotten it might fairly be reckoned among the anomalous verbs of the weak conjugation. 289. In a large number of these words, Middle and Modern English have developed full forms along- side of the contracted ones, and some of the former are even more common than the latter. Especially is this true of the earlier period of Modern English. The full forms kneeled, dreamed, and leaned are the only ones found at all in our version of the Bible, or in Shakspeare, or in Milton's poetry. Leapt, though going back to the Old English period, is far from being as common as leaped. The simple verb reave, outside of the past participle, is now little used ; and the compound bereave has almost invariably bereaved in the preterite, though bereft is occasionally met with. Cleaved, moreover, is nearly as common as cleft. Full regular forms of some of the others have occasionally made their appearance. On the other hand, both Ben Jonson and Wallis in their grammars give dread and even tread as preterites in good use in the seven- teenth century, and the latter says that beeped and weeped, though by no means so common as kept and wept, were nevertheless employed. 290. The vowel-variation in these words is a devel- opment of the later speech. It is unknown to the earliest period of the language. At that time, nearly every one of the above-mentioned verbs that existed in it and was inflected weak had a long vowel in all the principal parts, as the primitive forms show dis- 382 English Language. tinctly. In Anglo-Saxon there were, however, more than a score of verbs of the weak conjugation, in which there was a real variation of vowel in the pret- erite. Some of these have disappeared from the tongue altogether, others have become perfectly regu- lar. In the following list will be found the verbs of this second class (282) which survive, with their origi- nal and transitional forms. Through all periods it will be observed that in the preterite and past participle the termination was added directly to the stem, with- out an intervening vowel ; and as these verbs are con- stantly confounded by many with those of the strong conjugation, the endings will be distinctly marked. 291. The list comprises the following words : — 1. bringan, broh-te, broh-t. bringe(n), brough-te, brough-t. bring, brough-t, brough-t. 2. bycgan, boh-te, boh-t. buyen, bough-te, boh-t. buy, bough-t, bough-t. 3. secan, soh-te, soh-t. seche(n) ) , , , . ,\ y >, sough-te, sough-t. seke(n) > seek. 1 be-seech/' S ° Ugh " t ' ^^ 4. sellan, seal-de, seal-d. selle(n), sol-de, sol-d. sell, sol-d, sol-d. 5. tellan, teal-de, teal-d. telle(n), tol-de, tol-d. tell, tol-d, tol-d. Irregular Weak Verbs. 383 6. (>encan, ' to think,' Jioh-te, Jjoht. thenke(n), though-te, though-t. think, though-t, though-t. 7- byncan, ' to seem,' }»uh-te, buh-t. (me)thinketh, (me) though- te. (me)thinks, (me) though- •t. 8. wyrcan, worh-te, worh-t. worche(n), wrough-te, wrough-t. work, wrough-t, wrough-t. 292. To these eight may be added two others : One is teach, in which, in Anglo-Saxon, there was no variation of the vowel, though there was the usual change of consonants found in those verbs whose stems terminated in a guttural. The other is catch, which comes from the Old French. The following are the forms : — 9. tiecan, tish-te, taeh-t. teche(n), taugh-te, taugh-t. teach, taugh-t, taugh-t. 0. cacche(n), cau;-te, cau?-t. catch, caugh-t, caugh-t. 293. To these words may be added two others, — reach and stretch, — which belonged originally to this same class. In Modern English they have conformed thoroughly to the regular inflection, though in its first period the original one not infrequently appears. The following are the forms these verbs exhibited in Anglo- Saxon and in Early English : — 384 English Language. raecean, rshte, rceht. reche(n), raughte, raught. streccean, streahte, streaht. strecche(n), straughte, straught. 294. In Shakspeare raught occurs four times as a preterite, readied not at all ; but the participial forms raught and reached both appear, each once. In other Elizabethan dramatists, also, raught occurs not infre- quently, though it cannot be found in our version of the Bible. The form straught became obsolete much earlier, though it has affected the variant of distracted) from the Latin distractus, causing it to assume the form distraught. To the list may also be added the verbs pitch and shriek, some of whose older and irregular forms made their appearance as late as the seventeenth century. The former in Early English was conjugated as follows : — picche(n), pighte, P'ght. The latter as follows : — shrike(n), shrighte, shright. In both cases the past participle was the form that maintained itself most vigorously. 295. Several of the verbs of this class have developed regular forms alongside of the irregular ones. Selled and tcllcd, for instance, go back certainly to the four- teenth century, and can he met with in the sixteenth, and perhaps later. During the whole history of Mod- Irregular Weak Verbs. 385 ern English catched and teached, which go back to the Old English period, have maintained themselves alongside of caught and taught, though the present tendency is to regard them as improper. Beseechcd made its appearance in the sixteenth century, and is still in use, though far less common than besought. On the other hand, worked has largely displaced wrought. Its origin seems to be comparatively late. It was certainly in existence in the seventeenth cen- tury, 1 but apparently it was not till the eighteenth that it began to be generally employed. 296. This concludes the consideration of the two general classes of anomalous verbs of the weak conju- gation. There remain two verbs which have under- gone contractions peculiar to themselves. They are have and make, and the manner in which the existing forms have been developed out of the preceding ones can be traced in the following scheme : — habban, habbe(n) have( han have, n) I, hsefde, havede -j hadde / ' had, hrefed "» gehrefd J haved had had. }■ macian, make(n), make, macode, makede > made ) made, macod. maked mad made. The compound behave does not, however, follow its 1 It is mentioned by Wallis in his Grammar. 386 English Language. primitive, but is now inflected regularly ; though at one period it formed the preterite behad. 297. One other verb remains to be mentioned. This is clothe, which has for its original two Anglo- Saxon verbs with the same signification. One is cladian, from which the modern verb has developed its regular inflection ; the other cliedan, from whose preterite cliedde came the Early English cladde and the Modern English clad. 298. There are, furthermore, two participial forms that require consideration. One is the contracted form dight, which is now practically all that is left of the Anglo-Saxon verb dihian, ' to set in order,' in Early English dihte(n). The participle belongs rather to poetry than to prose, and it is rarely that any other part of the original verb occurs. The other word is fraught. This is the contract past participle of the Early English verb fraughte(n), — unknown to Anglo- Saxon, — which verb in Modern English has been sup- planted by its variant freight. 299. With the statement that certain verbs ending in y change this y to i in the preterite, as say, said, pay, paid, — which is nothing more than an ortho- graphic variation, — the history of all the irregular forms of the weak verbs now existing has been given. It is possible, indeed, that anomalous forms not men- tioned here may occasionally be found ; but, if so, they are all explainable according to the analogy of the various forms that have been described. The Strong Past Participle. 3cS/ PAST PARTICIPLE OF THE STRONG CONJUGATION. 300. It is the formation of the preterite that con- stitutes the fundamental distinction between the strong and the weak verb. Still there is an important and well-recognized difference between the terminations of their past participles. Those of the weak verb ended, in the earliest period of English, either in -d or -/, as they end now ; those of the strong during that same period ended in -en, except in a few instances where the e was syncopated. The past participles of both conjugations agreed, however, in often prefixing the particle »• bit i 5- choose, 2. ride, ridden, •> rid. < 6. cleave, 3. slide, slidden, ■> slid. J 7- freeze, 4. write, written, •> writ. i 8. seethe, The Strong Past Participle. 393 IV. gotten, 1 13- get, got. Droken, -i " 9. break, \ spoken, -, broke - j 14. speak, I . , spoke. ) stolen, -> r 10. steal, V trodden,-, stole. J I5 . tr cad, 'I trod. > V. bidden, 16. weave, trod woven wove '} DKtcien, -1 II. bid, > bid. i VII. eaten, -i beaten, 12. eat, eat. -1 Deaten, -i 17 • ^ beat. \ 311. This list is true only of the present usage. Even during the Modern English period there are several other verbs — notably stride and smite — that have exhibited shortened forms besides the full ones. To it may be also added the originally weak verbs cMde and hide (175), which have in the participle the double forms chidden, chid, and hidden, hid, respec- tively. In regard to most of these verbs it is sufficient to say that the full forms are now ordinarily preferred. The shorter ones belong generally to the colloquial rather than to the literary speech. Still no rigid in- variable rule can be laid down in regard to the employment of either, and the widest diversity of usage has existed, and still continues to exist, in respect to many of them. 312. In the case of the verbs which have just been considered, it is the original past participle that has 394 English Language. continued to exist, whether in a full or in an abbrevi- ated form. But there are a number of verbs in which this original participle has been discarded entirely. Its place has been supplied in two ways. Just as there were strong verbs in which the form of the participle made its way into the preterite, so also, in a few in- stances, the form of the preterite made its way into the past participle. The following is the list of verbs in which this transition of the preterite into the participle has occurred, and is still in use ; the older forms, when entirely obsolete, are printed in Italics : — nfinitive. New Passive Participle. Old Passive Participle hold, held, holden. drink, drank, drunk. sit, sat, sitlen, \ sit. i stand, stood, slondiii. wake, wuke, waken. (a) bide, (a)bode, (ci)bidden. shine, shone, shinen. 313. It was in the sixteenth century, particularly in the latter part of it, that most of these transitions were effected. The existence of the etymologically correct form shinen is perhaps doubtful. At any rate the weak form shined was for a time much more common than that of the >trou^ preterit'-. Drank, especially in the last century, threatened to drive out drunk entirely; but, though still in good use, the strictly The Strong Past Participle. 395 correct form is coming to be generally preferred. Almost the same statement can be made of ate, though this as a participial form has never been as common as drank. 314. These words in the list just given are, how- ever, merely the relics of what was once a general movement, which has been almost entirely arrested. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries the use of the preterite for the past participle was common in a large number of verbs in which it is no longer seen. The literature of the Elizabethan period, and later, abounds in instances of the use of rode for ridden, of forsook for forsaken, of shook for shaken, of drove for driven, of took for taken, and of wrote for written. There are several other verbs in which a similar use of the preterite occurs with more or less of frequency. In some instances, it looked as if they might displace the regular forms, just as stood has driven out the ety- mologically correct stonden. They lasted down fre- quently to a late period, and are occasionally to be met with now. Wrote, for illustration, is very common for written in the literature of the eighteenth century, and even began for begun and rose for risen can be then found in good use. 1 But though some of these 1 As examples which might be almost indefinitely increased, the following are given : — Labienus — This is stiff news — hath with his Parthian force, Extended Asia from Euphrates: His conquering banner shook from Syria 1 i \ dia and to Ionia. Sijakspeare's Antony and 1 . scene 2. 39^ English Language. '&"»" -^<-'"s'^S' preterites occasionally appear now as participles, the language at the present time is averse to their employ- ment, and is disposed more and more to use exclu- sively the etymologically correct form (223). 315. In the case of two verbs which belong both to the weak and to the strong conjugation, the place of the strong participle has been taken by the weak. These are crow and cleave, 'to adhere,' which now present the following forms : — Infinitive. Preterite. Past Participle, cleaved . . > cleaved 1 cleave (1.). , \ . clave J , . crew 1 crow (vii.), \ , crowed > cleaved, crowed. The strong participle crown is sometimes found in poetry, but the form is archaic. 316. There remain to be brought together a num- ber of verbs at first inflected strong, which, though going over to the weak conjugation, continue still to 1 I low am I mistook in you. A ferry Wives of Windsor, act iii. scene 3. To unfold What worlds or what vast regions hold The immortal mind, that hath forsook Her mansion in this fleshly nook. Milton, II Penseroso, line 91. He had rose pretty early this morning. — Fielding, Joseph Andrews, I., ch. 16. llor tears which had long since began to wet her handkerchief.— lb., IV., ch. 11. The Strong Past Participle. 397 retain their original past participle. They have, in consequence, double forms. There are nine of these, as will be seen in the following list : — 1. grave (vi.), 2. hew (VII.), 3. lade (vi.), 4. mow (VII.), 5. shape (vi.), 6. shave (vi.), 7. sow (vil.), 8. swell (in.), graved, hewed, laded, mowed, shaped, shaved, sowed, swelled, } } graved, graven. hewed, \ hewn. laded, laden. mowed, \ mown. I shaped, shapen shaved, shaven. sowed, sown swelled swollen :} } To this list belongs, also, the Early English strong verb : — 9. rive (1.), rived, rived, riven : } To these may perhaps be properly added gnaw and wax, which occasionally exhibit the strong participial forms gnawn and waxen (231). For burs ten, carven, and molten see Section 204. 317. It has already been pointed out (246) that the weak verbs show, strew, and saw developed strong past participles which are now in good use, and that 398 English Language. hidden and chidden are strong participles formed by adding -en to the preterites of weak verbs (175). These forms, which are in their origin corruptions, are now established as correct. They may have come into the language at the outset from the Northern dialect, which, as we have seen, was inclined to retain the full form of the past participle. For not only did the Northern dialect so prefer the termination -en as to retain it in the cases where it strictly belonged, it also manifested the disposition to add it to words to which it did not properly belong. Certain weak verbs, such as cast, cut, put, thrust, mainly of Scandinavian origin, added the ending -en to the weak passive participle, which by contraction had become the same as the infinitive, as it is in Modern English. This produced such forms as casten, cutten, putten, thrusten or throssen. Of a precisely similar formation is the verbal adjective boughten, not infrequent in certain districts of America, and found occasionally in the literature of England. 318. It cannot be said that such forms as these have ever made their way to any extent beyond the dia- lects in which they originated ; but scattered through the whole of Modern English literature are occasional instances of the substitution of a strong participial termination for that of a weak one, usually for the sake of the rhyme. This is true, at least, of its earli- est period. The participial forms sain for said, be- reaven for bereaved, sweaten for sweat{ed} , paven for paved, arc examples which show the existence of this The Strong Past Participle. 399 tendency, even though the forms have not been adopted. 1 But a most marked instance belongs to the present century. This is the past participle proven for proved. The word is derived from the French, and like all other foreign verbs has until the present century been inflected, in literary use, accord- ing to the weak conjugation throughout. But the strong participial form proven has made its way from the Scottish sub-dialect of the Northern dialect into the language of literature, and not only has grown common, but promises to become universally ac- cepted ; for it is widely employed by many of the best modern writers, and, in particular, occurs in the prose of Lowell, and frequently in the later poems of Tennyson. 319. Two other participial forms are worthy of attention. The verb bear has two forms, born and borne, of which the latter is the one in general use, while the former is limited to the passive sense of 1 Both thou, and all the rest of this thy train, Shall well repent the words which you have sain. Greene, Alphonsus, ed. of 1861, page 231. Where sense is blind, and wit of wit bereaven. Terror must be our knowledge, fear our skill. Daniel, Civil Wars, Book I., stanza 123, ed. of 1602. Grease, that's siueaten From the murderer's gibbet, throw Into the flame. Shakspeare, Macbeth, act iv. scene 1. Rise, rise, and heave thy rosy head From thy coxaX-paven bed. Milton, Comus, line 886. 400 English Language. ' brought forth.' This distinction between the two did not become accepted till towards the end of the last century. In the early period of Modern English lie had also a past participle lien along with lain ; but this no longer exists save in poetry, and even in that is rare. PAST PARTICIPLE OF THE WEAK CONJUGATION. 320. The past participle of weak verbs was formed in the primitive Indo-European by adding to the stem the suffix ta. Of this the consonant appeared in the early Teutonic tongues as ///, /, or d. In Anglo-Saxon it was d ' ; and, as the vowel of the suffix had disap- peared, it was d only that was added. This was joined on directly to the connective o of the second weak conjugation, as luf-o-d, ' loved ' ; or to the con- nective e of the first weak conjugation, as dem-e-d, 'deemed.' But sometimes this connective e was dropped, in which case d often became /. In general, also, the history of the past participle of the weak conjugation is, since the fifteenth century, the same as the history of the preterite, when the dropping of the final -e by that part of the verb brought about in them both identity of form. The former was con- sequently subjected to precisely the same changes that befell the latter. To this there is one slight exception. 321. Either after the analogy of verbs whose past participle is precisely the same in form as the present tense, as hit, hurt, or because they were made to re- Number and Person of the Verb. 401 semble their Latin primitives, a number of verbs in the Middle English period did not always add -d to form the past participle ; as consummate (Lat. con- summat-us) for consummated, create (Lat. creat-us) for created, pollute ( Lat. pollut-us) for polluted. These forms without final -d belong mostly to words that are derived from Latin verbs of the first conjugation ; but they are not limited to them. The usage extended down to the Modern English period, and can hardly be said to have been abandoned before the end of the seventeenth century. Certain writers are remarkable for their fondness for such forms. As a general rule, they are employed in an adjectival sense • but even then their participial character is plainly apparent. The participial adjective situate for situated, common in legal phraseology, is a survival of this usage. NUMBER AND PERSON. 322. As regards the three primitive numbers, the Gothic was the only one of the Teutonic languages that retained the dual of the verb ; but, even in that, it was confined to the first and second persons. At the time that language was committed to writing, the third had disappeared ; and, in order to say that " they two " had done anything, the plural form had to be used. In English the verb, through all the stages of its his- tory, knows only of the singular and plural numbers : no trace of a dual appears in its earliest monuments. 323. A commonly received theory as to the origin of the personal endings is, that the personal pronoun, 4-02 English Language. as the subject of a verb, was originally placed after it, and not before it, as now; just as if we, instead of saying 1 hate ; they hate, should say, hate I, hate they, and so on for the other persons. According to this theory the pronouns, appended to the stem of the verb, gradually united with it so as to form one word ; as even in Early English, for illustration, thinkest thou or sayest thou often appears as one word, thinkestow, seistow. Thus joined to the verb, they came at last to be regarded as an inseparable part of it, as really belonging to it. Then they were used to form the inflection of the tense ; but as the personal pronouns originally appended to the persons to denote the sub- ject were different, the endings were, at first, necessarily different in all cases. 324. When these pronouns had become so thor- oughly united with the verb as to form one word, the recollection of their original pronominal character was certain in time to pass away. They came to be looked upon simply as an integral part of the inflection of the verb, and not as separate words or syllables denoting the subject. As this feeling grew predominant, a per- sonal pronoun was frequently put before the verb as its subject. This naturally became more and more common as the sense of the original pronominal nature of the personal ending became fainter and fainter. When it had become a constant practice to employ the personal pronoun as the subject of the verb, and usually preceding it, the necessity of an ending to denote the person was gone ; that was denoted by Personal Endings of the Verb. 403 the personal pronoun which was the subject. The value of distinct terminations for the persons was accordingly destroyed. 325. If the theory be true, it was inevitable that under such circumstances the terminations should be confounded, and, if much confounded, that many of them in course of time should disappear. This has been fully exemplified in the history of the Teutonic languages, and of our own in particular. In Gothic there is a distinct termination for each of the three persons of the plural of the present indicative, ;// for the first person, -th for the second, and -nd for the third. In Anglo-Saxon this diversity of endings had been given up in this number of this tense. The terminations of the first and third persons had been entirely abandoned, and -th, the termination of the second person, had become the common termination of the three. 326. The result was just as marked in the case of the present subjunctive. In this mode the Gothic still preserved the distinction of the various persons by the endings. In the Anglo-Saxon, however, while there was a distinction of form between the singular and the plural, the three persons of the singular had all the same termination, as had likewise the three persons of the plural the same. A similar statement can be made about the plural of the preterite. Here the older tongue, the Gothic, still preserved the dis- tinction of persons by the endings, while in Anglo- Saxon but one of these original endings survived. 4°4 English Language. This was strictly the termination of the third person, which was extended to the other two. But barren of these endings as is our earliest speech when compared with the Gothic, it is rich when compared with what we have to-day. The history of the tenses will show the steady loss in this respect that has overtaken the inflection. TENSES OF THE VERB. 327. The English, like all the Teutonic tongues, has but two simple tenses, — the present and the preterite. About them as centres have been devel- oped verb-phrases which express the ideas and rela- tions conveyed by the inflectional forms to be found in other languages. The use of these two tenses is far more limited in Modern English than it was in the ancient speech. The present then generally expressed also the ideas for which we now use, not merely the future but the future perfect ; while the preterite denoted what is now conveyed by the imperfect, the perfect, and the pluperfect. These forms have, more- over, undergone changes so various, that it will be necessary to consider each one of the two simple tenses by itself. THE PRESENT TENSE, INDICATIVE AND SUBJUNCTIVE. 328. The following paradigms of the strong verb singan, ' to sing,' and of the verbs deman, ' to judge,' and erian, ' to plough,' of the first weak conjugation, and locian, ' to look,' of the second, will show the The Present Tense. 405 inflection of the present indicative and subjunctive in the Anglo-Saxon period. 32Q. Singular. Indicative. Subjunctive, sing-e, sing-e, sing-est, sing-e, sing-eft. sing-e. sing-aft. sing-en. Singular. Indicative. Subjunctive. luc-ie, loc-ast, loc-aft. 16c-ie, loc-ie, loc-ie. Indicative. Subjunctive. dem-e, dem-e, dem-est, dem-e, dem-eft. dem-e. dem-aft. dem-en. Indicative. Subjunctive. er-ie, er-ie, er-est, er-ie, er-eft. er-ie. loc-iaft. loc-ien. er-iaft. er-ien. 330. In these paradigms it will be seen that the stem of the strong verb singan is sing ; that the con- nective is a weakened to e in the singular of the indicative and in both numbers of the subjunctive ; and that the personal endings, so far as they have preserved, are -st of the second, and -d of the third person singular, -d of the plural indicative, and -?i of the plural subjunctive. Most verbs of the first weak conjugation do not differ here from the strong verb in 406 Engl is Ji Language. their inflection. In the second weak conjugation it will be noticed that the place of the connective o has been taken by the connective ia, which, however, is only seen pure in the plural indicative. 331. This is the common inflection in the Anglo- Saxon, as it is exhibited in the classical dialect, the West-Saxon. But, after the Norman Conquest, the present tense of the verb exhibited marked differences in the three great dialects of the English speech, that arose and developed literatures of their own during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. These dif- ferences are most marked in the plural number. If we represent the present tense of singen as it would be inflected in each of these dialects, we should have displayed the following forms : — Singular. Southern. Midland (East). Northern. 1 st Form. 2d Form. I sing-e, sing-e, sing, sing-e (s), Thou sing-est, sing-est, sing-es, sing-es, He sing-eth. sing-eth. sing-es. sing-es. Plural. Hi or They sing-eth. sing-en. sing. sing-es. What is true of singen is also true of verbs of the weak conjugation. 332. It is evident at a glance that the Southern forms are much nearer the classic Anglo-Saxon than either of the others ; and that the Midland are pre- cisely the same as the Southern in the singular num- ber. As regards the Northern, it is to be remarked The Present Tense. 407 that the forms in -s go back to a period before the Conquest, although the scantiness of Northumbrian literature, and the uncertainty attending the date of composition of the little that has been preserved, make positive statements hazardous as to the time of the transition of the final -d into -s, or the extent of usage of the latter. 333. It will be observed, however, that there are two sets of Northern forms. One of these, though going back to the thirteenth century, is far nearer Modern English than either of those found in the Midland or the South. In general, it may be said of the two, that, when the verb has for its subject a personal pronoun directly preceding it, it uses the first form ; but in other cases the forms in -s are usually though not invariably found. In consequence, in the Northern English of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, they think and men think would ordinarily be represented by thei think and men thinkes; and this is still a peculiarity of the Scotch dialect. 334. It is the Midland form, however, that has been the ruling one in Modern English. It has, it is true, been seriously affected by the two dialects bor- dering upon it. During the Early English period the influence of each one of the three upon the one near- est it was plainly perceptible. The Eastern Midland has not unfrequently the plural ending -th, and even occasionally the Northern third person singular in -s. This latter form was far more common in the West Midland division of the Midland dialect, upon which 408 English Language. the speech of the North exerted in certain details a powerful influence. But the later history of these forms will be confined to the history of the present tense of the East Midland dialect. 335. We begin with the first person of the singu- lar. Even in the earliest period this had usually dropped the personal ending. The connective e, which had consequently become the termination, was also given up in the Middle English period. In this, the Northern dialect preceded the Midland, and, doubtless, largely influenced it. This ending -e really disappeared from all verbs ; but it was retained in the spelling of many, though never sounded in pro- nunciation, as in love and give; and this has con- tinued the practice down to the present time. The Northern dialect also added -s at times to the first person, probably from a false analogy with the other persons, which all had this ending. This occasionally appears in English literature as late as the sixteenth century, though in many cases it is hard to tell whether the termination was due to design or to typographical error. 336. The second person, through all the periods of English, outside of the distinctively Northern dia- lect, has regularly ended in -si, and there has never been a time when the supremacy of this termination has been seriously shaken. Still, the form in -s ap- peared even in West-Saxon, and after the Norman Conquest it was the regular ending of the Northern dialect. As late as the Elizabethan period, this same The Present Tense. 409 form will be found occasionally alongside of -st, as can be seen in the following examples : — Thou art not thyself; For thou exists on many a thousand grains That issue out of dust. Shakspeare, Measure for Measure, act iii. scene 1. My sharpness thou no less disjoints. Jonson, Epigram 58 But in such cases the final /was almost always dropped, in order to avoid the crowding together of numerous consonants, caused by the previous dropping of the connective e. In the examples above given, the full forms would be exist-e-st, disjoint-e-st. 337. The suffix -d of the third person singular was in the Anglo-Saxon period frequently changed into -s in the North of England ; and, in the works still ex- tant in the Northumbrian dialect, forms in -3" and -s stand side by side. By the thirteenth century, how- ever, the latter had completely supplanted the former in this division of English speech. Outside of it, the ending -th was regularly employed, not only during the Old English, but during the Middle English, period. Chaucer almost invariably has the third person singu- lar terminating in -th, except when he designedly represents the dialect of the North. The very few instances in which he otherwise has the ending -s (as in "The Boke of the Duchesse," line 257) are due to the necessity of rhyme. 1 1 Instances occur, however, in the East Midland dialect, in which the forms in -s are found where the necessity of rhyme cannot be 410 Englisli Language. 338. But in the sixteenth century the termination in -s gradually made its way from the Northern dialect into the language of literature. After the middle of that century, it became with each succeeding year more common. For about a hundred years, the forms in -s and -th lasted side by side with apparently little general difference in their usage. Books and writers naturally varied. The authorized version of the Eng- lish Bible does not employ the third person singular in -s. Ben Jonson does not even mention it in his grammar, although it is of constant occurrence in his writings. But, by the middle of the seventeenth cen- tury, the form in -s had become the prevailing one, and has since that time become nearly the exclusive one. It is the English Bible that has kept alive the form in -th ; but it is rarely employed now, save in poetry and in the solemn style. During the eighteenth century occasional efforts were made to revive it, and the form hath in particular was frequently employed instead of has. But the practice did not continue. 339. The Midland plural -en is of uncertain origin. By some it is regarded as being nothing more than an intrusion of the subjunctive ending -en into the indica- tive, helped by the fact that this same termination was also that of the preterite. To whatever due, it was a alleged, as in the following extracts from LANGLAND'S Vision of Piers Plowman, Text 15: — And as his loresman leres hym, bileueth and troweth. Passus xii., 183. Thus the poete preues that the pecok for his fcthercs is reuerenced. Passus xii., 260. The Present Tense. 411 distinctive characteristic of the Midland dialect, and showed itself as early as the end of the twelfth century. The Southern speech, as has been seen, varied little from the classic Anglo-Saxon, and formed its plural in -ctli, the connection a or ia of the latter having in all cases become e in the former. The Northern, hav- ing often changed the -ad into -as before the Norman Conquest, adopted after that event the form -es or -s exclusively, or dropped the termination altogether. These three terminations of the plural lasted side by side for centuries ; and, though strictly denoting differ- ent dialects, they were to some extent interchanged. As a result, there are but few old English and still fewer Middle English manuscripts in which at least two forms are not represented, though one is naturally much more common than the other. 340. It is from the Midland form in -en, however, that the Modern English has strictly been derived. Still it is evident that the Northern forms, existing as early as the thirteenth century, without any termina- tions at all, must have had great influence in bringing about the result we now see. The -n began to be widely dropped, even early in the Middle English period ; and this in time was followed by the abandon- ment of -e in most cases. Tellen, for example, became telle, then tell. The vowel naturally disappeared first in pronunciation ; and its disuse in pronunciation was generally, though not invariably, followed by its dis- use in orthography. The dropping of the -// and the dropping or retention in the spelling of the -e, caused 412 English Language. all the persons of the plural to assume the same sound and form as the infinitive and the first person of the singular. It has already been stated ' that, according to Ben Jonson, this -en was employed until the time of Henry VIII. " But now," he adds, "whatsoever is the cause, it hath quite grown out of use, and that other so generally prevailed, that I dare not presume to set this afoot again ; albeit, to tell you my opinion, I am persuaded that the lack hereof, well considered, will be found a great blemish to our tongue." 341. The termination -en is occasionally found through the whole of the sixteenth century ; but it appears as an avowed archaism, not as a form in con- stant and current use. It is, therefore, limited to the language of poetry. In the latter part of this century, a great impulse was given to its employment by the practice and authority of Spenser, who introduced it largely into his writings. In this custom he was fol- lowed for a time by no small number of admirers and imitators. By the middle of the seventeenth century it had. however, disappeared almost entirely from lit- erature of any kind. It was regularly revived in the numerous imitations of Spenser that were produced in the eighteenth century, such, for instance, as Thom- son's "Castle of Indolence" (a.d. 1748). As a natural result, it was often misused, — a fate which had occa- sionally befallen it in the sixteenth century. Even then we find it sometimes appended to the first person, producing such forms as I /oven, I passen, — forms 1 See page 152. The Present Tense. 413 which have never been actually used by anybody in any period. Errors of this kind, however, were alto- gether more frequent in the eighteenth century. 342. The Northern plural in -s lasted in reality to a much later date than the Midland form in -en. In the prose literature of the sixteenth century it is far from uncommon, -and it can be found even later, in the seventeenth. These statements are especially true of the third person ; the first and second with this ending are by no means frequent, though occasionally found. But there are more than two hundred plurals in -s to be met with in Shakspeare's plays, though these are changed wherever possible in modern texts, and can only be found by consulting the original editions. In some instances the metre has required their reten- tion; 1 in others the rhyme, as in the following song from the third scene of the second act of "Cymbe- line": — Hark ! hark ! the lark at heaven's gate sings, And Phoehus gins arise, His steeds to water at those springs On chalic'd flowers that lies. The plural in -s is by no means confined to Shak- speare, however, but is in fairly frequent, though hardly what can be called general, employment during the whole Elizabethan period. By the middle of the seventeenth century, however, it had gone out of literary use. The language of low life, however, retains to some extent this form to the present day. 1 See page 129. 414 English Language. 343. The Southern plural in -th was never so com- mon as the Northern in -s, but, so far as literature is concerned, may be said to have lasted somewhat later. With the writers of the Elizabethan period it is largely confined to the two forms doth and hath, which occur, however, with a good deal of frequency, though, as in the case of the Northern forms, they are usually made in modern editions to conform to modern grammar. Specimens of the usage can be seen in the following extracts : — Ladies and tyrants never laws respectctk. Daniel, Delia, Sonnet xxxi. (early editions). By it doth grow About the sides all herbs which wretches use, All simples good for medicine or abuse. Fletcher, Faithful Shepherdess, act ii. scene 3. 344. In Anglo-Saxon a contracted form existed in the second and third persons of the present singular, confined to verbs whose stems ended in -d, -t, or -s. It is exemplified in the following paradigm of rldaii, ' to ride ' : — 1 . ic rid-e, 2. fiu rkl-est, or rist, 3. he rid-e'o", or rit. These contract forms, especially in the third person, lasted long after the Conquest. Through the whole of the Old and Middle English periods they are constantly to be met with, as bit from biddctii, rit The Present Tense. 415 from ridetli, sit from sitteth, rist from riseth, glit from glidcth, stant from stardeth. By the beginning of the Modern English period, the full forms had generally taken their place ; or perhaps it would be better to say they were displaced by the form ending in -s. The verb list, meaning ' please,' still continues to show in the modern language the contracted form list, along with the forms listeth or lists. 345. It is hardly necessary to say that, in all the early periods of the language, there are many varia- tions from the forms that have been here given. The connective e is often syncopated ; it is replaced often by y or i ; the -t/i of the endings frequently appears as -/ or -d; and numerous other variations could be men- tioned which need here no more than a general refer- ence, as they have had no influence upon the forms existing in the modern speech. 346. The history of the present subjunctive forms is essentially the same as of those of the indicative. As in the Midland dialect, both possessed in the plural the same ending -en, all that has been said of that number of the latter will also apply to the former. The disappearance of the -n from both modes took place at the same time, as did also the disappearance of the -e in those cases where it was dropped from the spelling at all. It is only in the second and third persons of the singular that the subjunctive forms differ at all from those of the indicative ; and the second person is so little employed, that now the only marked difference of inflection is in the third person. 4 1 " English Language. It is mainly owing to these two modes assuming almost the same inflections throughout that the distinct shades of thought once expressed by the subjunctive, as con- trasted with the indicative, have practically disappeared. To denote these, the language is now obliged to resort to other methods, the discussion of which belongs to syntax exclusively. THE PRETERITE. 347. As it is the method of forming the preterite which constitutes the fundamental distinction between the weak verb and the strong, it is important to give several examples of the inflections of this tense. As, furthermore, the inflection of the weak preterite is not only simpler than that of the strong, but has also inlluenced the latter in the ending of the second per- son singular, it is the one that will be first considered. THE PRETERITE OF THE WEAK CONJUGATION. 348. For the purpose of exhibiting the inflection of the weak preterite, the verbs deman, ' to deem,' and erian, ' to plough,' of the first conjugation, will be taken and locian of the second. The following are the paradigms : — Singular. Indicative. Subjunctive. Indicative. Subjunctive, i- ic dem-de, dem-de, er-e-de, er-e-de, 2. fm dem-dest, dem-de, er-e-dest, er-e-de, 3. he dem-de. dem-de. er-e-de. er-e-de. Plural. 1. we \ 2. ge dem-don. dem-den. er-e-don. er-e-den. 3. In > The Weak Preterite. 417 Singular. Indicative. Subjunctive. I. ic loc-o-de, loc-o-de, 2. Jm loc-o-dest, loc-o-de, 3. he 16c-o-de. loc-o-de. Plural. i . we \ 2- ge \ loc-o-don. loc-o-den. 3. Ai J 349. As has been previously pointed out (255), e became the general connective of all these verbs in Early English. Furthermore, the forms of the indic- ative and subjunctive plural were assimilated by the weakening of the indicative ending -on to -en. Then followed one additional modification. The final -n of the plural was frequently dropped, even as early as the twelfth century ; and this practice became more and more common in the centuries which followed. By the beginning of the Middle English period it was the usual, though not invariable, practice in the Midland dialect. Hence in it the inflection of these same verbs regularly assumed, at that time, the following form for the indicative : — Singular. Singular. Singular. dem-e-de, er-e-de, lok-e-de, dem-e-dest, er-e-dest, lok-e-dest, dem-e-de. er-e-de. lok-e-de. Plural. Plural. Plural. dem-e-de(n). er-e-de(n). lok-e-de(n). 350, In the fourteenth century also, in this same Midland dialect, the final -e of the singular was more 4i§ English Language, often neglected than retained in the pronunciation. The disuse of it in pronunciation led to its abandon- ment in the spelling. In the fifteenth century it dis- appeared entirely, as a rule, leaving the forms as they are now seen, though the failure to treat the -ed as a separate syllable did not become the general practice till later. This same state of things is true of the preterite plural, after it had discarded the final -;/, and also of the subjunctive forms. In this sloughing off of the endings, the Northern dialect had, as usual, taken the lead. As early as the thirteenth century, it not merely showed occasional instances of such forms, as denied and loked instead of denude, demeden, and lokede, lokeden ; they were even then the regular rule. THE PRETERITE OF THE STRONG CONJUGATION. 351. Of the Anglo-Saxon strong verbs the inflec- tion of the preterite of singan, ' to sing,' of dnfan, 'to drive,' of forsacan, 'to forsake,' and of growan, ' to grow,' will be given. The following are the para- digms : — Singular. Indicative. Subjunctive. Indicative. Subjunctive. i. ic san J4' sung-e, dial, drif-e, 2. f>u sung-e, sung-e, drif-e, drif-e, 3. he sang, sung-e. draf. drif-e. Plural. i. we \ 2. ge y sung-on. sung-en. drif-on. drif-en. 3- h\ ) The Strong Preterite. 419 Singular. Indicative. Subjunctive. 1. ic fursoc, forsoc-e, 2. pit forsoc-e, forsoc-e, 3. he forsoc. forsoc-e. ndicative. Subjunctive. greow, greow-e, greow-e, greow-e, greow. greow-e. Plural. i . we 2. ge 7. hi forsoc-on. forsoc-en. greow-on. greow-en. 352. There are four things to be especially noted in the Anglo-Saxon inflection : — 1. The personal endings have entirely disappeared from the first and third persons of the singular of the indicative. 2. The termination of the second person singular of the indicative is not -st, as in the weak preterite, but is -e. 3. The vowel of the second person singular is pre- cisely the same as the vowel of all the persons of the plural indicative, and of all the persons of both num- bers of the subjunctive. 4. In the preterite of all the strong verbs repre- sented by singan and drifan, the vowel of the first and third persons of the indicative singular is different from that of the second person of the same number, and from the vowel of all the persons of the plural and of both numbers of the subjunctive. 353. In certain particulars the later history of the inflections just given is the same as that of the pret- erite of the weak conjugation. There was the same 420 English Language. weakening of the ending -on into -en, and the conse- quent assimilation of the plurals of the indicative and the subjunctive. There was the same dropping of the final -n, to be followed afterward by the dropping of the final -e. As the history of the subjunctive is here, as in the present tense, involved in that of the indica- tive, it may be disregarded ; and the indicative pret- erites of the four verbs may be placed side by side, as they appeared in Early English. Singular. Singular. Singular. Singular. I. sang, drof, forsok, grew, 2. sung(e), driv(e), forsok(e), grew(e), 3. sang. drof. forsok. grew. Plural. Plural. Plural. Plural. 2. 3. sunge(n). drive(n). forsoke(n). grewe(n) 354. The forms here given are those of an in- flection theoretically correct, rather than the ones invariably employed. The variations are, in fact, ex- ceedingly numerous. In the second person singular, the tendency toward uniformity began to make itself felt in the latter part of the fourteenth century ; and the -est or -st of the weak conjugation was sometimes substituted for the -e of the strong, so that sunge, for illustration, was replaced by sang(e)st or sung(e)st. In the fifteenth century this became the established practice. It is the distinction, however, between the vowel of the first and third persons of the indicative singular and that of all the persons of the plural, The Strong Preterite. 421 which is of most importance in the later history of the strong preterite. To this is due mainly the existence of the different forms which have prevailed, and to some extent continue to prevail still. 355. Of the seventy-eight Anglo-Saxon strong verbs, which, as we have seen (241), have lasted down to our time, nineteen represented in the paradigms given above by forsoc, 'forsook,' and greow, 'grew,' do not exhibit this peculiarity ; but the remaining fifty-nine all possessed it, and in many instances transmitted it to later English. With the inflection before us, the origin of the varying forms that have been or are in use can easily be traced. Let us take, for illustration, the history of the preterite of the Anglo-Saxon verb singan, ' to sing ' ; for the comprehension of the de- velopment of one verb involves that of all. 356. In the earliest period of English, when one wished to say / sang, or sung, he used the form ic sang; when he wished to say we sang, or sung, he used the expression we sungon. The plural preterite differed from the singular by having a termination -on, and by change of vowel. After the break-up of Anglo-Saxon, the first thing to be affected was this ending -on. In accordance with the principle already so often stated, the vowel was weakened into e, and sungon became sungen. But, along with this weaken- ing of the vowel, there was also a tendency to drop the final -//, and sungen became snnge. The next steps were to drop the final -e in pronunciation, and then in writing ; and we have, in consequence, for the 422 English Language. preterite plural, the form sung. Hence there re- mained, as a result, two forms for the preterite, — one for the singular and one for the plural, — differing from each other only by a single letter, and that letter a vowel. 357. It was inevitable that a distinction seemingly arbitrary, and serving no useful purpose, should break down ; and this was what happened. The confusion that soon arose in the usage of an uneducated people, would be materially increased by the fact that the second person of the singular, then much more widely employed than at present, had a form different from that of the first and third persons. After the endings had been dropped, it was impossible that these distinctions should be permanently preserved. They were doubt- less kept up by individuals long after they had dis- appeared from the language of the great mass of men. To say / sang and we sung was, probably, vaguely felt by many, and loudly maintained by some, to be the only correct usage ; even when, in the ordinary speech, men had become accustomed to say indifferently, / sang and we sang, or I sung and we sung. 358. In particular verbs, also, the distinction lasted much later than it did in others. On this point the scansion of the verse makes it clear that dissyllabic, that is, plural, forms of certain preterites were required when the subject was in the plural, and monosyllabic ones when the subject was in the singular. An examina- tion of the best manuscripts of Chaucer's poetry leaves little doubt, that, with him, gan was regularly the sin- The Strong Preterite. 423 gular of the preterite ; gunnen,gunne, or gonnen, gonne, the plural.' The same statement may be made as to his use of shal, ' shall,' and shallen or shulle. The exceptions to such use, by him, of this tense of these two particular words are very rare, if they can be fairly deemed to exist at all. Still in his time the distinction between the singular and the plural of the preterite of most verbs had broken down generally, and the forms originally belonging to one number were used for both. Not unfrequently, both forms were used indifferently and interchangeably. Hence arose a double set of preterites, such as drank and drunk, began and begun, sprang and sprung, rode and rid, wrote and writ, which have been transmitted to Modern English. 359. These double preterites were far more nu- merous in the Middle English period and at the beginning of Modern English than they are now. The tendency of the language has been steadily to reduce their number. Many forms, which, even in the early period of Modern English, were in good use, have now disappeared altogether, or are heard only in the language of poetry or of low life. Ben Jonson, in his grammar, gives lists of verbs that had two different forms for the preterite in his time ; and, in a large proportion of them, one form is now obso- lete or antiquated. Attention has already been called 1 It was ten of the clokke he gan conclude. Prologue to Man of Law's Tale, line 14. Til that the coles gonne faste brenne. Canon's Yeoman's Tale, line 181. 424 English Language. to a number of these belonging to Class I. (168), of which this statement is particularly true. But Jonson also gives to climb, of Class III., the two preterites clomb and climb; to fling, the preterites flang and flung; to swing, the preterites swang and swung; to wring, the preterites wrang and wrung, and, in like manner, double forms to many others. 360. In the majority of cases in which the verb reached the Modern English period with two pret- erites, one form came from the original singular and one from the original plural. This we have just seen exemplified in the case of sang and sung. The lan- guage shows, however, an increasing aversion to the retention of these double forms. They have been steadily lessening from the sixteenth century to the present time, and, from present indications, are des- tined ultimately to disappear, at least from common usage. Yet there remain a number of verbs which con- tinue to have two forms for the preterite. They all belong to the third or the first class, and are given in the following list, with the Anglo-Saxon originals added in parentheses. Infinitive. Form from the Singular. Form from the Plural. drink, drank (dranc), drunk (drunc-on) . gin, -gan (gan), -gun (gunn-on). shrink, shrank (scranc), shrunk (scrunc-on). sing, sang (sang), sunjj (jung-ori). sink, sank (sane), sunk (jsunc-on). slink, slank (sin nc), slunk (slunc-on). The Strong Preterite. 425 Infinitive. Form from the Singular, Form from the Plural. spring, sprang {sprang) , sprung (sprung-ori). stink, stank {shine), stunk (stunc-on). swim, swam {swam), swum (szvumm- on) . ride, rude (rad), rid (rid-on).' write, wrote (wrat), writ (writ-ori). 361. Ring, when it went over to the strong conju- gation in the Old English period, followed the example of sing, and developed rang and rung. To this list, moreover, may be added bid and eat, of Class V., which have double forms in use, though but one is derived from the original preterite. In the case of eat, the vowel-sound of the preterite is sometimes long, as in ate, sometimes short, as in cat; in the latter, the barbarous spelling, as not unusual, gives no clew to the pronunciation. 362. The history of the use of the double forms just given, as well as of those no longer found, makes it clear that there has been a steadily growing pref- erence, especially in late Modern English, for the employment of the forms derived from the singular. Drunk has never been so common as drank, and the same thing may be said, though in a far less degree, of begun as compared with began. But in the case of the two verbs of Class I., ride and write, the forms rid and writ, once frequently met with, are now almost entirely limited to the language of poetry, and are comparatively rare in that. During the last century 426 English Language. the forms from the plural in the list given above were in most instances decidedly more common than those derived from the singular. The reverse is true of the present century. For illustration, Pope (1688- 1744), in his poetical works at least, invariably uses rung, sung, sunk, and sprung, never rang, sang, sank, and sprang. Furthermore, he has writ as a preterite nine times, while he so uses wrote but once. On the other hand, the usage of Tennyson is precisely oppo- site. With him the forms from the plural are far less common than those from the singular, and in the case of some verbs are never met with at all. 1 The usage of the representative poets of the two periods may be taken as fairly representing the change which has come over English usage in this particular respect. 363. To what is this change due? In spite of the present tendency to employ forms derived from the singular, it is evident that there was a time when there prevailed a preference for those derived from the plural. This is especially the case with the verbs of Class IIL (190), which have been the ones mainly under consideration. In these, the following forms derived from the plural are now exclusively in use : — 1 This statement is based upon the Concordance to Tennyson's poetry, which, however, comes down no later than 1869. Accord- ing tn it, Tennyson, up to that time, had used rang as a preterite 20 times, rang \\ times, sprang 10, swam 3, and began 12, against rung 3, sung 11, and sprung, swum, and begun, each once. He had a used drank 13 times, shrank 3 times, and s.iuk 20 times, againsl no instances of drunk, shrunk, and sunk. In the case of , the translation oi Homer is excluded. The Strong Preterite 427 1. bind, bound (bund-on). 7. sting, stung (stung-on). 2. cling, clung (clung-on). S. swing, swung (swung-on). 3. light, fought (juhlon). 9. win, won (wunn-oii) . 4. grind, ground (grund- on). 10. wind, wound (wund-on). 5. sling, slung (slung-oti). u. wring, wrung Qivrung-on) 6. spin, spun (spunn-on). 364. The general preference for forms from the plural of certain verbs, especially in the earlier period of Modern English, was largely due to the influence of the past participle. In the case of verbs belonging to the first and third classes, these two parts of the inflection were almost the same in Anglo-Saxon. In Early English they came to be exactly the same. Let us take the verb turitan, of Class I., and singan, of Class III., as exemplifying the processes which brought about identity of form. The preterite plural of the first is writon, the past participle is writen; of the second, the corresponding parts are sungon and sungen. Consequently the only difference in each case between the two forms is in the vowel of the unaccented final syllable. When of the preterite plural was weakened to ). 394. In the Southern dialect, as early as the twelfth century the participle was often confounded with the gerundial infinitive in -ennc. More important, how- ever, as regards the future of the form, was the fact that in the same dialect it began at the same early The Participles. 447 period to assume at times the termination of the verbal substantive. This in Anglo-Saxon ended usually in -ung, but sometimes in -ing. After the Norman Conquest, the latter became finally its exclusive form. It became also the form finally adopted by the present participle. Necessarily the only distinction at first between it and the verbal noun was that the former had in addition a final -e. 395. From the Southern dialect, this form in -inge passed into the Midland, and after losing its final -e, was adopted as the standard form in Modern English. The Northern participial ending -aud(e) was due to Scandinavian influence, but never made much head- way in the Midland. Still such forms as glitterand, followand, coinand were occasionally employed in these dialects, and have sometimes been used in Modern English by those seeking to reproduce the language of the past. 396. The simple present and past participles belong to the earliest period of the language. On the other hand, the compound participles are all of later growth, and though useful, are none of them absolutely indis- pensable. The forms that have been developed will be illustrated by the use of the transitive verb love and the intransitive go. Being loved. Being gone. Having loved. Having gone. Having been loved. Having been gone. Having been loving. Having been going. 448 English Language. 397. These various forms seem to have come into existence in the order just given. The first of them, the composition of being with the simple past partici- ple, probably made its first appearance in the lan- guage in the fifteenth century ; but it did not become current till the earlier part of the sixteenth. Even then it is not often met with, though in this respect there is great difference in writers of that time. It was not until the latter half of that century that the compounds of having with the past participle came much into use. Necessarily the compounds with hav- ing been were still later. Of these, the joining of this compound to the past participle seems to have long preceded its joining to the present participle ; that is to say, such participial phrases as having been gone were earlier, as even now they are much more com- mon, than those represented by having been going. The former were certainly in use in the latter half of the sixteenth century. On the other hand, the com- position of being with the present participle, though perfectly legitimate in theory, has scarcely been known in practice. Expressions like being going, found in Shakspeare's " Cymbeline" (act iii. scene 6), are very rare. PASSIVE FORMATIONS. 398. The primitive Indo-European tongue had two voices, — the active, and the middle or reflexive, which, from the very beginning, seems to have as- sumed the functions of the voice we call the passive. The Passive Voice. 449 The use of the reflexive to do the office of the passive is common enough in many modern tongues where the reflexive pronoun is not united with the verb, nor changed at all in form and how easy the transition is in sense can be shown in our own speech by many familiar examples. I persuade myself, for illustration, differs very slightly, and in some cases not at all, from / am persuaded. It is from the reflexive that the passive has been developed in the history of the lan- guages of the Indo-European family. 399. But in the Teutonic branch only one of these voices can be said to exist. The Gothic, indeed, had a middle, which, with some few exceptions, was used in a passive sense ; but it was only found in the present tense, and in that the persons were much confounded. These and other signs show, that, at the time of the translation of the Bible by Ulfilas, the form for this voice was going out of use. In the other Teutonic tongues, occasional traces of a passive, which must once have existed, can be found ; but they are few in number and slight in importance. The only one which our earliest speech retained was hatte, meaning equally ' I am called,' or, ' I was called.' 400. In all of the early tongues of the Teutonic branch, the loss of the form was supplied by com- pounding the passive participle with the present and preterite of verbs corresponding in meaning to our verbs be and become. In Anglo-Saxon these verbs were three : beon and wesan, both meaning ' to be,' and weorpan, meaning 'to become.' The last verb has 45° English Language. now gone out of use in our speech ; but it existed as an independent verb down to the beginning of the Modern English period, 1 though almost always in the phrase woe worth, meaning ' woe be.' In German, the corresponding form werden was chosen as the auxiliary to form the passive ; but in English it was never common after the Anglo-Saxon period, and indeed cannot be said to have been common during it. In Old English the formation of the passive with the present and preterite of wesan and beon became early predominant, and worthe(n) gradually went out of use. 401. When the forms of worthe{n), ' to become,' had been given up, those of the substantive verb represented by am, was, and be were the only ones left to express the passive. It was, from the nature of things, an office for which they were ill calculated ; for, with a verb which expresses a simple action, and not a continuous state, the compounding of its past participle with the present tense of the substantive verb did not denote something actually taking place, but something which had taken place. The field is reaped corresponds in form to the man is hated; but it does not correspond in the sense given to the verbal phrase. With the latter expression there is existing action implied ; in the former, only a com- pleted result. This was a difficulty inherent in the employment of this form. To avoid it, the language 1 What will worth, what will In- the end of this man ? LATIMER, Lent Sermons (Arber's reprint, page 120). The Passive Voice. 451 resorted to expedients of all kinds : it changed the construction of the sentence, it employed various cir- cumlocutions, and at last, in the eighteenth century, it adopted verb-phrases made up of the present and preterite of be and the compound passive participle. The more detailed history of the passive formations in such expressions as the field is being reaped has already been given, and need not be repeated here. 1 As stated there, the use of these forms, like that of the emphatic forms with do and did, is confined to the present and the preterite tense. 402. The discussion of the use of the passive belongs strictly to syntax, and finds properly no place here ; and it is only necessary to repeat what has been previously said, that in the freedom with which, and in the extent to which, the passive is employed, English has gone far beyond other cultivated tongues. Such phrases as he was given a book, he was told the truth, and the like, run back to the Middle English period, and occur in all the great writers of our tongue. Expressions like the one in the following line, — Be not denied access, stand at her doors, Shakspeare, Twelfth Night, act i. sc. 4, — are often ignorantly condemned by those who are unaware that these exemplify one of the most thor- 1 See pages 170-173. The employment of this formation was foreshadowed in the seventeenth century. In a tragedy of Thomas Porter's, first published in 1663, occur the following lines: — The fear of thceves is worse than the loss we can Sustain by them ; we're still a being rob'd. The Villain, ed. of 1670, page 30. 45 2 English Language. oughly established and characteristic idioms of the English language. PRETERITE-PRESENT VERBS. 403. In all the early Teutonic tongues, there were a number of strong verbs whose preterite tense had assumed the signification of a present ; and along with this, and perhaps in consequence of it, the original present tense had gone entirely out of use. A familiar illustration of this assumption by a past tense of a present meaning can be seen in the collo- quial use in Modern English of / have got in the sense of ' I have,' ' I possess.' 404. The process, however, had not stopped at the point indicated by this common expression. When the original present had disappeared, the original pret- erite, which had assumed entirely the signification of a new present, went on to develop a new past tense. This Litter was always of the weak conjugation. So, in the inflection of the new present tense, the peculi- arities of the preterite of the strong conjugation are found ; while in the new preterite the inflection is the one which regularly characterizes the weak verbs. 405. In Anglo-Saxon there were twelve of these verbs. Of these, seven continue to exist in some form, or have left traces of themselves to some extent in Modern English. As each has had a history of its own, each will necessarily be treated of by itself, so far as the changes which it has undergone have not ilready been discussed in the account given in the The Preterite-Present Verbs. 453 previous pages of the inflection of the verb. Only the forms of the present and the preterite indicative are here laid down. The subjunctive has nothing about its history different from that of other verbs, and the other parts are developed in some of these verbs, and absent in others. It is, however, to be added that the infinitive forms here given are in several instances purely hypothetical. 406. To Class I. of the strong verbs (167) belong the first two : — (1) Agctn. This has given rise to both a defective and a regular weak verb in Modern English. The defective verb ought is in its origin the new weak preterite of this preterite-present verb ; and its relations can only be comprehended clearly by examining the original forms. Sing. Present. Preterite. I. ag, ah, I 07vn, possess, ahte, ought, 2. aht, ahst, ahtest, 3- ah. ahte. PI. I. 2, 3. agon. ahton. 407. By comparing the Anglo-Saxon forms with those of its class, it will be seen that, even in the earliest period, this verb had deviated from the regular inflection ; for the vowel of the plural had become the same as the singular, and we have agon instead of 454 English Language. igon. The present forms continued to be employed in the Early English period, but were gradually sup- planted by the preterite. From the infinitive the word owe came into use, and, after having for a while ought as its preterite, developed the regular form owed. The general signification of ' possess,' expressed by this verb, came also to be limited largely to the possession of debts. In this sense of pecuniary obli- gation the preterite owed was in time employed by preference. This left the older preterite ought to convey exclusively the idea of moral obligation or of fitness. To this one signification, essentially, it is now confined. It is also limited to this one tense ; though the language of the uneducated shows a constant ten- dency to treat ought as a past participle, and the verbal phrase had outfit is regularly employed by them. From the original past participle agen, the adjective own has been derived. (2) Witan. 408. The forms of this verb have given rise to much misunderstanding. All difficulties connected with it disappear at once on an examination of the original inflection : — Sing. Present. Preterite. i. wat, loot, wiste, wist, 2. wast, wistest, 3. wat. wiste. PI. 1, 2, 3. witon. wiston. The Preterite-Present Verbs. 455 409. Of this verb, the infinitive, to wit, still exists in Modern English, especially in legal phraseology, but used in the adverbial sense of 'namely.' Another form of it, weet, is occasionally found in our earlier poetry. The present and preterite, though little em- ployed, are still retained, mainly through their occur- rence in the Bible. The plural of the present, wife '(«), lasted down to the fifteenth century, but wot of the singular had largely taken its place considerably before that period ; and after it, the latter form was almost invariably used of both numbers. 410. In the sixteenth century wot farther developed itself as a regular verb of the weak conjugation, hav- ing an infinitive wot, and in the present tense singular, wot, wottest, wotteth or wots, the preterite wotted, and the present participle wotting. These forms did not permanently establish themselves, nor were they ever as common as the older and correcter forms. The following are examples : — Your grace may sit secure, if none but we Do wot of your abode. Marlowe, Edward II, act iv. sc. 6. Thou wottest not what thou sayest. Peele, Edward I. (ed. of 1861, page 382). No man -wotteth better what he should do and say. More, Edward V. (reprint of 1812, page 510). The ploughman little wots to turn the pen. Lodge, Rosalynd. 45 6 Englisli Language. And why he left your court, the gods themselves, Wotting no more than I, are ignorant. Shakspeake, Winter s Tale, act. iii. sc. 2. I which wotted best His wretched drifts and all his cursed case. Sackville, Complaint of Buckingham, line 710. 411. The Early English present participle witting is found occasionally in the Modern English period, and is still preserved in the adverb unwittingly. The similar past participle wist was never very common outside of the phrase 'Had I wist,' and is now obso- lete or archaic. The negative verbs not, from ne wot, and niste, from ne wiste, died out in the Middle English period. As might be expected, as the word wot became obsolescent, its character was sometimes mistaken, and it was used with a preterite meaning instead of a present, as in the following quotation from Bunyan's "Pilgrim's Progress " : — There he stood still, and he wot not what to do. (Ed. of 1678, page 18.) 412. Very curiously, a singular blunder produced a new verb as the supposed present of wist. The old past participle of witan was gewiss, which became an adjective in Anglo-Saxon, with the meaning of 'cer- tain.' It has already been stated that the Anglo-Saxon prefix gewas turned, in Early English, into y or i (301). The Anglo-Saxon adjective gewis{s), 'certain,' accord- ingly became in Early English the adverb /wis, or is, 'certainly.' In the sixteenth century this was The Preterite-Present Verbs. 457 frequently printed Iwis, or / wis. As a consequence, the capital / was supposed to be the personal pronoun, instead of the modern representative of the prefix ge ; and wis was accordingly assumed to be a verb, and regarded as the present of wist. Wis has rarely, if ever, been used outside of the phrase / wis, which is, however, by no means uncommon in poetry, even in our own day. A verb wisse(n), wis, — from Anglo- Saxon wissian, 'to show,' 'to instruct,' — died out in the Middle English period, and has no connection with the present word. 413. To the third class of verbs of the strong con- jugation (189) belong two preterite-presents. The first is : — (3) Cun nan. The following is the inflection of the verb in Anglo- Saxon : — Sing. Present Preterite. I. can(n), can, cu!Se, could, 2, canst, cuSest, <5 J- can(n). cirSe. PI. 1 2 cunnon. cuSon. 414. It will be seen, that, even in the Anglo-Saxon, the weak termination of the second person, canst, had taken the place of the regular strong form, cunne. In Early English coude is found alongside of couttie as a form for the preterite, and in process of time sup- 45 8 English Language. planted the earlier form. Into this coud(e) in the sixteenth century an / was inserted, by a false analogy with would an.1 should ; but it has never been pro- nounced. The verb never had a present participle, and its past cud — in Early English couth or coud — has gone out of use ; though, as an adjective, it sur- vives in the last syllable of un-couth. The infinitive has also disappeared, though it was common in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries in the form comic, and in the sense of 'to be able.' In the form can, it still continued to exist in the seventeenth century, though as an archaism, and is sometimes met with even in our own day. Examples are : — Ne no man dies shal me conne espye. Chaucer, Legend of Good Women, line 2044. In will the best condicion is not to will, the second not to can. Bacon, Essays, ed. of 1623. (Of Great Place.) 415. Can as an independent verb survives, how- ever, in the form con, ' to learn,' and is regularly inflected according to the weak conjugation, as, for example, ' He has conned his lesson.' Furthermore, in the Northern dialect, there came into frequent use a form can, which was in its origin a mere variant of gan, and used like that with the infinitive to represent the preterite (378). Later, it sometimes came to be confounded with the present-preterite can, and, in consequence, the past tense couthe or coude of that verb was erroneously used in the sense of 'did.' The Preterite-Present Verbs. 459 416. (4) Darrein. Sing. Present. Preterite. 1. dear, dare, dorste, durst, 2. dearst, dorstest, 3. dear. dorste. PI. 1, 2, 3. durron. dorston. The presence in Anglo-Saxon of the infinitive of this verb is doubtful. During that period it will be observed that the original form durre of the second person had been supplanted by dearst. 417. As the existing present is in its origin a pret- erite, the third person of the singular is precisely the same as the first ; but the tendency to make it con- form to the regular inflection, and form its third person in -s, has been powerful since the beginning of Modern English. Both forms, he dare and he dares, have flourished side by side during the last three centuries. The verb, furthermore, shows a disposition to go over entirely to the regular form of the weak conjugation. The old, irregular, weak preterite durst is now far less common than formerly, and in the sense of ' to challenge, defy,' is never em- ployed at all. This form durst made its way at one time into the past participle. In all of its meanings, indeed, dare is now frequently inflected regularly, and the new forms have largely supplanted the old. Dared made its appearance as early, certainly, as the end of the sixteenth century, and its employment has steadily increased from that time. 460 English Language. 418. To the fourth class of strong verbs (205) belongs : (5) Sen Ian. Sing. Present. Preterite. i. sceal, sliall, sc(e)olde, should, 2. scealt, sc(e) oldest, 3. sceal. sc(e)olde. PI. 1, 2, 3. sculon. sc(e)oldon. 419. In Anglo-Saxon, ic sceal meant ordinarily 'I am under obligation,' ' I ought,' ' I must.' Its transi- tion to express the future has already been pointed out in the account of that tense (372). It has re- mained throughout its history faithful, comparatively speaking, to the Anglo-Saxon form ; and the distinc- tion between the vowel of the singular and of the plural was kept up, at least by some writers, as late as the fifteenth century. In fact, this verb preserved this distinction after most of the other strong pret- erites had abandoned it; shal and sliul{cn) being, in the fourteenth century, the respective methods usually found of denoting the singular and the plural, rhe Northern diale< 1 sometimes contracted this verb. In that, such tonus as Ise, 'I shall,' and others of a similar character, not unfrequently make their appearance. 420. To the fifth class of strong verbs (211) belongs : — The Preterite-Present Verbs. 461 (6) Magan. Sing. Present. Preterite. I. mseg, may, meaht | miht J ' meahte > mihte i meahtest "> mihtest / ' might t 2. 3- mseg. meahte | mihte / PI. 1, 2, 3. magon. meahton ~> mihton / 421. Mag meant, in Anglo-Saxon, ' I have power,' ' I am able,' but in this signification its place has been taken by can. The infinitive magan or mugan is not found in Anglo-Saxon, but in Early English appears in various forms, of which mowe(n) may be taken as the representative, as seen in the following example : — For who is that ne wolde hire glorifie, To mowen swich a knight don live or die. Chaucer, Troilus and Cryseyde, ii., 1594. Precisely similar forms became established for the present tense, as : — Right so mcnve ye out of myn herte bringe, Swich vois, right as you list, to laughe or pleyne. Chaucer, Legend of Good Women, line 92. The second person singular of the present tliou might lasted down to the Middle English period, and was 4^2 EnglisJi Language. not entirely supplanted by mayst until the fifteenth century. Mought, the Early English variant of might, has now become dialectic. 422. To the sixth class of strong verbs (221) belongs : — (7) Mo tan. Sing. Present. Preterite. 1. mot, mote, moste, must, 2. most, mostest, 3- mot. moste. PI. 1, 2, 3. moton. moston. 423. The infinitive is not met with either in Anglo- Saxon or later English, and the verb itself has had a history different from most of the others. It existed in full vigor down to the Middle English period. In that the present mot was used in the two senses of max and of must. Therfore, in stede of wepynge and preyeres, Men moot yeve silver to the poore freres. Chaucer, Prologue to Canterbury Tales, line 232. But al mot ben assayed, hoot and cold, A man mot ben a fool, or yong or old. //'., Knighfs Tale, line 953. In the sense of may, the place of mot was taken by the preceding verb mceg, and in the sense of mast, its own weak preterite supplanted it, and has now come to be used both as a present and a preterite. Must The Preterite-Present Verbs. 463 has now no inflection whatever, and to indicate certain preterite relations the language has had recourse to verb- phrases based upon to he obliged. The original mot has practically disappeared from Modern English. Though it is occasionally heard, it is limited to a few phrases, such as so mote it be, or to imitations of the archaic style. 424. Besides these, relics of two other Anglo-Saxon preterite-present verbs lasted down to a comparatively late period. One of these is darf, ' I need,' with its weak preterite dorfte. This verb, in Early English, frequently dropped the /, probably owing to the confusion which prevailed to Some extent between it and dare. It was generally used impersonally with a dependent dative, as will be seen in the following example : — And therfore this proverbe is seyd ful sooth, Hym thar nat wene wel that yvele dooth. Chaucer, Reeve's Tale, line 400. The confusion that existed between this verb and dare is exemplified in the use of the preterite in the following line : — Thou thrnste nevere han the more fere. Chaucer, Troilus and Cryseyde, iii., 572. Here several manuscripts have durste, though the context requires the sense of ' needest.' 425. The other verb is man, or mon, ' I intend,' with its weak preterite munJe. This verb has lasted 464 English Language. down to the Modern English period. It has been especially common in the Northern dialect in the forms moun, maun, and mini, and its prevalence in that was largely due to the influence of the Old Norse munii. With the infinitive it frequently served as a verbal phrase equivalent to the future, and can often be rendered by 'am to,' 'am about to,' passing over into the sense of obligation. Examples are : — I mun be maried a Sunday. Ralph Roister Doister (Arber's reprint, page 87). A gentleman mun show himself like a gentleman. BEN JONSON, Every Man in his I Junior, act i. sc. 1. 426. To this list of preterite-present verbs of the early language that still survive, in some form, to our day, there is allied one, which, even in its original form, presents great irregularities. This is wittan, one of the auxiliaries now used by us to express the future. It was origin illy a subjunctive of the preterite, but had discarded some of the' forms belonging to the subjunctive, and taken those of the indicative in their place. Willan. Sing. Present. Preterite. i. wille, wile, will, wolde, would, 2. wilt. woldest, 3. wille, wile. wolde. Pi. 1, 2, 3. willaft. woldon. The Preterite-Present Verbs. 465 427. In Early English, forms of the present with instead of/ were common, and wo/ and wil stood side by side until the fifteenth century. Wol, indeed, is constantly met with in the literary language of the fourteenth century, though it never succeeded in driv- ing out wil. For example : — And at a knight than wol I first biginne. Chaucer, Prologue to Canterbury Tales, line 42. A relic of this once frequent use of wol has been pre- served in the colloquial form won't. This is a con- traction of wol not, which was itself sometimes found in the forms wonnot or wonot. From this the transi- tion to won' 7 was easy. 428. A negative form of this verb, mile, 'will not,' nolde, ' would not,' was in existence during all periods of the language down to the beginning of Modern Eng- lish. Occasional instances of its occurrence can be found later, though usually it is employed in expres- sions like will he, nil! he, 'will he, or will he not,' where there is a designed contrast with the simple verb ; such as is exemplified in Shakspeare's "Taming of the Shrew," act ii. scene 1 : — Will you, nillyou, I will marry you. The colloquial though little used willy, nitty still pre- serves the negative verb. 429. Apparently, by analogy with the preterite- present verbs, the verb need frequently drops the -s of the third person singular of the present tense when 466 English Language. followed by the infinitive of another verb. ' He need not do it,' for instance, is a method of expression much more common than ' he needs not do it.' This usage certainly goes back to the beginning of the sixteenth century, and is perhaps earlier. 430. Beside the preterite-present verbs, there are three others which deserve special mention. One of these is the verb do. Don. Present. Preterite. 1. do, dyde, 2. dest, dydest, 3. de'8. dyde. I, 2, 3. do"8. dydon. 431. The modern forms exhibit little variation from the Anglo-Saxon, except that in the second and third persons of the present singular they have abandoned the original vowel-variation. The Early English doth, based upon the Anglo-Saxon dod, lasted as a present plural into the Modern English period (343). It is found frequently in Shakspeare, though in modern editions it is usually changed, without notice, into the standard form do. The second person singular doest is used as a principal verb, and not as an auxiliary, whereas the other form dost is used regularly as an auxiliary, rarely as a principal verb. A similar state- im lit may be made of the two forms in -th of the third person, doeth ami doth. 43 2 - The Irr egular Verb 'Go.' Gan. Present. Preterite. i- ga, eode, 2. gaist, eodest, 3. ga??S. eode. 2, 3. gl«. eodon. 467 433. From the paradigm given above, it will be seen that the verb go, even in Anglo-Saxon, had supplied its preterite by a form taken from another stem. Eode continued to be used during the Old English period, and appeared usually in the form yede, and occasionally yode ; but early in the Middle English period it showed clear signs of falling into disuse. It occurs but three times in Chaucer, always in the form yede(n), as, for example : — Troilus ... in his chaumber sit, and hath abyden Til two or three of his messagers yeden For Pandarus. Troilus and Cryseyde, ii., 937. It is, however, more common in Langland, and occa- sionally appears in the poetry of the fifteenth century. 434. In the sixteenth century the existence of the two forms yede and yode led to a curious error on the part of those authors who were seeking to reproduce the diction of the past. Yede, often spelled yeed or yead, was treated as an infinitive or present, of which yode was the preterite. Thus Sackville, in the " In- duction to the Mirror for Magistrates," has the fol- lowing lines : — 468 English Language. Here enter'd we, and yeding forth, anon An horrible loathly lake we might discern. Line 196. Similar usage can be found in Spenser, as follows : — Then bad the knight his lady yede aloof. Faerie Queeiie, I., xi., 5. So long he yode, yet no adventure found, Which Fame of her shrill trompet worthy reedes. lb., II., vii., 2. 435. To supply the place of code, recourse was had later to another Anglo-Saxon verb, wendan, which had wende and went as preterite and past participle. To this verb strictly belong the compound tenses / hare went, I had went, which are sometimes met with late in the Middle English period. 1 The original preterite was wende or wente. The latter became the regular form in Old English, and in its shortened form went was at last adopted as the preterite of go in place of yede. The participle went also disap- peared ; and the verb wenden, which had now become wend by the dropping of the final -en, developed in its turn the regular form wended. 436. Gangan, a fuller form of this verb, can be found in the Anglo-Saxon period with a preterite geong. The present tense of gan adopted throughout in Old English the vowel of the first person, though 'They occur occasionally much later, e.g., "As if the scholars h.iil went from Cambridge to Northampton." — Diary of Thomas I I'Mi ii'-, May 9, 1730. The Substantive Verb. 469 even in Middle English the form geth, ' goes,' occa- sionally makes its appearance, as will be seen by the following example : — For vengeaunce of his sones deth None other grace ther ne geth. Gower, Confessio Amantis, Book V. Go, like do, was frequently used in the Midland dia- lect as a past participle. The past participle of the compound agan lost in Old English its participial use, and came to be employed as an adjective, or adverb, and still survives in ago or agone. 437. Finally, there remains the substantive verb. In its various parts three roots have been, and still are, represented. In the form of the verb regularly used in Anglo-Saxon, the root es is found in the pres- ent tense ; the root wes in the preterite, the infinitive, and the present participle. The root ben furnished additional and independent forms for the present, the infinitive, and the present participle. 438. Of this most important of verbs, it is desirable to give the history of most of the parts, and each will be considered separately. We begin with the two present tenses. Sing. Indicative. Sn bjunctive. Indicative. Subjunctive I. eom, sie, beo(m), beo, 2. eart, sie, bist, beo, 3. is. sie. MS. beo. PI. 1, 2, 3. sind, sindon . sin. b5o«. beon. 47° English Language. 439. The forms of the indicative singular, eom, eart, is, have been preserved, with little change, through all the periods of the language. The plural sind, or sindon, however, did not last long beyond the Anglo- Saxon period, nor did the subjunctive sic. In the Northumbrian dialect am was the form corresponding to the West-Saxon com, and in the plural of that dialect earon, or aron, was found side by side with sind, or sindon. Earon has also been pointed out as occurring in a very few instances in West-Saxon. Still it was to the Northern dialect, aided by its exclu- sive use in the language of the Scandinavian invaders of England, that we owe the general adoption into our tongue of are as the plural of the present tense. It was a gradual process. When sind was given up, the plural be, in the forms bcth, ben, and be, took its place in the dialect of the South and of the Midland. This continued to be the case for several centuries. Even at the beginning of the Middle English period, are was far from common in the Midland dialect. ( lhaucer almost invariably uses be or ben as the plural of the present ; and the same remark is true of Langland and (lower, though are is more common with them than with Chaucer. The Northern writers, however, commonly use are. From them the practice extended widely in the latter part of the fifteenth century, and became thoroughly established in the sixteenth. 440. Be, which, during the Anglo-Saxon period, was largely used as a future, maintained itself firmly The Substantive Verb. 471 as the regular substantive verb in the Southern dia- lect. In the singular form, be, beest, beth, it not only continues to this day to be heard in popular or dialectic speech, but at various periods has not unfre- quently made its way into the language of literature. The following paradigm will show the most common forms the inflection of its present tense assumed in the various dialects : — 1. be, 2. beest, 3. beth, bes. 1, 2, 3. beth, ben, bin, be, bes. 441. The plural be, furthermore, was constantly used as an indicative form down to the seventeenth century, and even later, and is still occasionally em- ployed in poetry, especially in the phrase there be. The tendency showed itself, in the sixteenth century, to limit the verb be to the subjunctive, and this has now become the established general rule. 1 The plural forms ben and bin have also been erroneously re- garded by some writers as singular, as in the fol- lowing passage : — Of tragic muses shepherds con no skill; Enough is them, if Cupid ben displeased, To sing his praise on slender, oaten pipe.' 2 This error has never, however, been common. 1 See page 167. 2 Peele, Arraignment of Paris, act iv. sc. 1. 472 English Language. 442. The preterite of the substantive verb is the preterite of a strong verb, of Class V. (219), partially obsolete in Anglo-Saxon, but fully preserved in Gothic. It was thus inflected : — Sing. Indicative. Subjunctive, I. WKS, wrere, 2. WEere, wrere, 3- WKS. wsere. PI. I, 2, 3. wseron wSren. 443. This is the only preterite which has retained in Modern English the vowel-variation once distin- guishing from the first and third persons of the in- dicative singular, the three persons of the plural, the second person of the singular, and all the persons of the subjunctive. It also exhibits clearly what was found in several Anglo-Saxon verbs, — the transition of the letter s into r, so that, instead of saying was or wese in the plural, we say were (14). During the Middle English period this preterite presented the following inflections : — Sing. Indicative. Subjunctive I. was, were, 2. were, were, 3- was. were. PI. • If 2, 3- were(n). were(n} 444. These forms have remained substantially un- changed during all the periods of the English language. The Substantive Verb. 473 An exception is to be made in the case of the second person singular, which, as is seen, is strictly were ; and, in fact, thou were has been always in use in poetry. But the abandonment of vowel-change in the second person of the preterite of strong verbs natu- rally led to the general disuse of this form. As early, certainly, as the Middle English period the form wast had appeared, as the following extract from the Wy- cliffite translation of the Bible shows : — Whanne sche hadde seyn Petre warmynge him, sche bihold- inge him seith, And thou wast x with Jhesu of Nazareth. Mark xiv. 67. The way for this form had been previously prepared by the not unfrequent employment in Old English of was for the second person. Still it was not till the sixteenth century that wast came into much use. From that time on, it tended gradually to supplant the original form, especially in the language of prose. 445. But along with were and wast there sprang up, probably in the early part of the sixteenth cen- tury, a new form, wert, which apparently was devel- oped after the analogy of shal-t, wil-t, and ar-t. This is met with frequently in the Elizabethan dramatists, and seems to have been then preferred by a few writers to wast. It has always been common in poetry. To that kind of composition it, like were, is in truth now mainly confined ; but this may be due to 1 liven here other MSS., as well as Purvey's recension, have were. 474 English Language. the fact that the second person itself of the verb is little used in prose. 446. The infinitives wesan and beon occur not unfrequently during the Anglo-Saxon period. By the end of it the former had disappeared, and the latter came into so general use that it has given its name to the substantive verb. The same statement is true of the present participles wesende and blonde, and the imperatives wes and beo. In each instance the forms of wesan were early supplanted by those of beon. None of these verbal roots exhibited a past participle during the Anglo-Saxon period. The existing form been, which originated in the Old English period, usually appeared for a long time as y-be, i-be, or simply be. 447. Dialectic and peculiar forms of the various parts of the substantive verb are to be found during all periods of its history. These it is neither possible nor desirable to enumerate here. One thing, how- ever, is worthy of special mention. In some of the Northern dialects, is was early used for all persons of the present singular and plural, and was for the same numbers and persons of the preterite. Examples of such employment have been given in Chaucer's imi- tation of the speech of the North. 1 From that quar- ter is sometimes made its way into the language of literature, especially in the writings of the Elizabethan dramatists. The following examples from Shakspeare will illustrate the practice : — 1 See page 1 20. The Substantive Verb. 475 He does smile his face into more lines than is in the new map with the augmentation of the Indies. Twelfth Night, act iii. sc. 2. What manners is in this ? Romeo and Juliet, act v. sc. 3. This usage is very common, when the substantive verb is followed by its subject, and accompanied (generally preceded) by here, where, but especially there. With this last the singular verb seems to have been generally and perhaps universally employed in Elizabethan dramatic literature. For example : — Thou think'st there is no more such shapes as he. Tempest, act i. sc. 2. There is tears for his love. Julius Ctzsar, act iii. sc. 2. This method of expression has indeed lasted down to our own time, and is very common in colloquial speech. 448. A similar usage of was has been less preva- lent, 1 but its employment in the plural with a personal pronoun as subject has been at times far more so. This is true at least of the second person, as used dur- ing the eighteenth century. You was, instead of you were, became then so common, that it seemed merely a question of time when the latter would disappear 1 All things was quiet. More, Richard III. (reprint of 1812, page 541). 476 English Language. altogether. The fashion of so employing it had pretty generally died out, however, by the end of the century. But even when the employment of yon was prevailed, cases of the use of was in the first and third persons of the plural were exceedingly rare. With the verb ends the foregoing brief survey of the changes that have taken place in the inflection of English. As a result of this examination, a few general inferences can be safely drawn. One of them is, that the history of language, when looked at from the purely grammatical point of view, is little else than the history of corruptions. The account contained in the preceding pages is largely a record of endings that have been dropped, or perverted from their proper use ; of declensions that have been inter- mixed ; of conjugations that have been confounded ; of inflections in every part of speech that have either passed away altogether, or have been confused with one another, and consequently misapplied. There are but few forms in use, which, judged by a standard previously existing, would not be regarded as gross barbarisms. Terminations and expressions which had their origin in ignorance or misapprehension are now accepted by all ; and the employment of what was at first a blunder has often become subsequently a test of propriety of speech. Nothing of this need be denied or even ques- tioned ; all of it may he ungrudgingly admitted. But it is equally true that these grammatical changes, or Purity of tJic Speech. 4.J7 corruptions, if one is disposed so to call them, have had no injurious effects upon the development of the language ; or if, in single instances, they have been followed by injurious effects, these have been more than counterbalanced by benefits which have been de- rived from other quarters. For the operation of these changes is merely on the outside. It is rare, indeed, that they impair, or even modify in the slightest, the real force of expression. It would now be looked upon as improper to say / have shook for / have shaken; yet, in the days of Shakspeare and Milton, the former was as allowable as the latter ; and at this time all of us in a similar way use the preterite for the past participle in / have stood, or / have understood, and are not even conscious in so doing that we are guilty of what is, in strict grammar, a barbarism. Changes of a character such as the foregoing — and most changes are of this character — affect merely the garb of speech, not speech itself. To suppose that the English tongue has suffered any loss of strength, that it has entered upon a period of decline, because we now say, for instance, stood, where etymologically we ought to say stonden, is no evidence whatever of decay on its part : it is merely evidence of ignorance on our part of what constitutes the real life of lan- guage. It is, at the present time, a fashion to talk of our speech as being in some way less pure and vigorous than it was in the days of Alfred ; mainly, because then it had, on the one hand, fewer foreign words, 478 English Language. and, on the other, more inflections, more formative affixes, and therefore more capacity for self-develop- ment. But the test of the value of any tongue is not the grammatical or linguistic resources which it may be supposed to possess, it is the use which it makes of the resources it does possess. It is, on the very face, an absurdity to speak of a form of a language which has been made the vehicle of one of the great literatures of the world, which has been found fully adequate to convey all the conceptions of genera- tions of illustrious men, as being inferior in power to a form of it, which, whatever its theoretical capacities, has embodied in its literature, as a matter of fact, little that is worth reading or remembering. As a mere instrument of expression, there is not the slight- est question as to the immense superiority of the English of the nineteenth century over that of the ninth. It is equally proper to say that the former is just as pure as the latter, unless we restrict that epithet, as applied to language, to the narrow sense of being free from words that are not of native origin. Even in this respect there was no difference in the influences that operated upon the two forms of the speech ; for the disposition to use foreign terms was just as potent in the Anglo-Saxon period as now, though the necessity for them was naturally far less pressing. No tongue can possibly be corrupted by alien words which convey ideas that cannot be ex- pressed by native ones. Yet this elementary truth is far from being universally accepted ; for it is a Stability of the Speech. 479 lesson which many learn with difficulty, and some never learn at all, that purism is not purity. Another inference concerns the assurance we may feel as to the stability of our speech derived from the influence, already immense and steadily increasing, of the language of literature. This is something that places tongues now in use in a position entirely differ- ent from that occupied by those employed in any pre- vious period in the history of the world. The cultivated speech is with us no longer confined to a small class which an irruption of barbarism, or a social and politi- cal revolution, may subject to the sway of those who speak a foreign or a corrupt idiom. It is the language of vast communities, and, through the operation of manifold agencies, is daily growing in universality and power. The whole tremendous machinery of educa- tion is constantly at work to strengthen it, to broaden it, to bring into conformity with it the speech of the humblest as well as of the highest. Day by day dia- lectic differences disappear ; day by day the standard tongue, in which is embodied classical English litera- ture, is widening and deepening its hold upon every class. The history here given, brief as it is, shows how violent and extensive have been the changes that have taken place in our inflection since the ninth century ; and yet, of those changes, how few in num- ber and slight in importance are such as belong to the last three hundred years. If the social and political agencies now in being continue to exist, we may confidently expect that the language of the future 480 English Language. will never materially vary from what it is to-day. Movement there must be. That is an essential char- acteristic of a living speech. But while differences will be developed, they will not be important either in their nature or extent. Pronunciation may perhaps be most affected ; but words and their meanings, gram- matical inflections and constructions, are no longer likely to move away on any large scale from usage which a great literature has made more or less familiar to all, and to the readers and students and creators of which every generation adds a constantly increasing number. English, in the form which it has had essen- tially for the last three hundred years, may doubtless disappear ; but its destruction, if it ever takes place, will be under conditions such as have never before existed, and will be owing to agencies which differ wholly from those that have brought about the ruin of any of the great cultivated languages of the past. INDEX TO SUBJECTS AND PERSONS. Accusative case, 197, 198, 209, 214, 215, 217, 218. Addison, Joseph (1 672-1 719), quoted, 275, 282. Adjective, the, 29, 96, 150, 241- 255; nominal, weak, or defi- nite declension of, 243-247; pronominal, strong, or indefi- nite declension of, 243-247. Affixes, loss and gain of, 107- 109, 112. Alfred the Great (r. 871-901), 25. 2 7> 32, 33. 42, 44- Alliterative verse, 30, 91-93. Angles, the, 22-24, 2 7- Anglo-French speech, the, 74- 76. Anglo-Saxon alphabet, the, 34- 36. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, the, 32. Anglo-Saxon language, the, 28, 83, 87, 88. Anglo-Saxon literature, 29-34. Anglo-Saxon version of Bible, quoted, 281, 292; gospel of Nicodemus, quoted, 284. Anglo-Saxon words, loss of, 106. Armorican tongue, the, 5. " Arthur and Merlin," poem of, quoted, 62. Article, the definite, 259, 260. Article, the indefinite, 299, 300. Aryan. See Indo-European. Ascham, Roger (15 15-1568), 71. Augustine, St. (died 604), 41. Bacon, Francis (1561-1626), 72, 179, 433; quoted, 166, 336, 45 8 - Barbour, John (1316?— 1395), 124, 135. Beaumont and Fletcher, 167. Bentley, Richard (1 662-1 742), quoted, 275. Beowulf, epic of, 31. Bernicia, kingdom of, 23. Bible, Authorized Version, of, 70, 164^169, ,354, 41X433; quoted, 166, 2S1V Black-letter, 35.-' "Blickling Homilies," 262,276. Bohemian tongue, the, 4. Breton tongue, the, 5. Bulgarian tongue, the, 4. Bunyan, John (1628-1688), quoted, 456. Byron, Lord (1 788-1824), quot- ed, 336. Gedmon (about 670), 31 ; quot- ed, 265. 481 482 Index to Subjects and Persons. Caesar's invasion of Britain, 18. Canute (r. 1014-1035), 44. Capgrave, John (1393-1464), quoted, 279. Case, 197, 198. See Nomina- tive, Genitive, etc. Caxton, William (1422 7-1491 ), ^ 158; quoted, 158-160, 433. Celtic branch of Indo-Euro- pean, 5. Chaucer (died 1400), 70, 71, 98-101, 119, 124, 132, 133, 136, 138, 144, 148-151, 164, 168, 208, 277, 333, 334, 346, 388,409, 422, 438; quoted, 75, IOO, I20, 174, 280, 281, 295, 298, 299, 423, 437, 444, 458, 461, 462, 463, 465, 467. Coke, Sir Edward (1552-1634), 287, 288. Comparison of the adjective, 247-255; irregular compari- son, 252, 253; double com- parison, 251, 252; compari- son with -er and -est, 248- 250; comparison with more and most, 250, 251 ; compar- ison of chief, supreme, per- fect, etc., 252; comparison with -ma and -mest, 254, 255. Compound nouns, 42, 109, no. Conjugation, old or new, 303, 305; conflict of the two conjugations, 307-312. See Verbs, strong and weak. ( lornish tongue, the, 5. Cornwall, John (about 1350), 63, 64. ( ow ley, Abraham (1618-1667), quoted, 439. "Cursor Mundi," 120, 121. Cymric branch of Celtic, 5, 18, 24, 38-40. ' Yneu ulf, 31. Daniel, Samuel (1562-1619), quoted, 414. Danish language, the, 9. Dative case, the, 197, 198, 209, 214, 215, 217, 218, 220. Decker, Thomas (1570?- 1641 ?), 167. Declension of the adjective, 201, 242-247. Declension of the noun, 198- 201, 209-213; in o, i, and u, 198-200, 209-21 1; in -n, 200, 211-213; confusion of the noun declensions, 213- 223. Declension of the pronouns, 201. See Pronouns. Deira, kingdom of, 23. Demonstrative pronoun, the, 257-263. Dialogus de Scaccario, 102. Double negative in English, the, 174. Douglas, C-awin (i474?-i522), 136. Dryden, John (1631-1700), 167. Dual number, the, 98, 198, 263, 264, 401. Dunbar, William (1465?- 1530?). i3»- Dutch language, the, 10. " Early English " period, the, 88, 206. East Anglia, kingdom of, 23, 44. East Germanic division of the Teutonic, 8. East Midland dialect, 122, 124, , 133- Edward the Confessor (r. 1042- 1066), 50. Egbert (r. 802-839), 25, 26. Index to Subjects and Persons. 483 Elene, Anglo-Saxon poem of, 437- English used by nobility, 55- 57- 59. 62. Erse tongue, the, 5. Essex, kingdom of, 22. Ethandun, battle of, 44. Exeter Book, the, 31. Finnish tongue, the, 12. Flemish tongue, the, 10. Fletcher, John (1 579-1 625), 167; quoted, 129, 275, 414. Florio, John(i553?-i625), 167. Frankish, the Low, 10, 196. French language, the, 6, 7, 73, 74- French language in England, 48, 5*. 53. 55> 57- 6 °- 6 7. 74- 81, 102, 132. French words in English, 85, 102-106, 124, 138, 144, 175. Frisian or Friesic tongue, the, 11, 196. Gadhelic branch of Celtic, 5, 39. 40. Gaelic tongue, the, 5, 134. Gender, natural and grammati- cal, 157, 210. Genitive case, 197, 19S, 209, 214, 217, 219, 220, 221, 242. Genitive ending in -s, 96, 126. German. See High German and Low German. Giraldus Cambrensis (1146?- 1220?), 1 17. Gothic tongue, the, 8, 195, 196, 198, 199, 202, 203, 205, 303. Gower, John (i325?-i4o8), 69, 7*. 333, 438, 443; quoted, 469. Greek language, the, 4, 175, 177, 197. Greene, Robert (i56o?-i592), quoted, 274, 275, 291, 337, 377- Harold (r. 1066), 50, 51. Hastings, battle of, 51. Hearne, Thomas (1 678—1735), quoted, 468. Hebrew tongue, the, 12. Heliand, the, 10. Hellenic branch of Indo-Euro- pean, 4. Henry I. (r. HOO-1135), 54. Henry II. (r. 1154-1189), 57, 102. Henry III. (r. 1216-1272), 56. Henry IV. (r. 1399-1413), 76-78. Henry V. (r. 1413-1422), 77- 79- Henry of Huntingdon (1084?- "55)» 53- Henry the Minstrel, or Blind Harry (about 14S0), 136. Henryson, Robert (1430?- 1506?), 136. Higden, Ralph (died 1364), 60, 123; quoted, 61, 1 1 8. High German speech, the, 9, 196, 198, 204. His as sign of the genitive, 281-283. Hooker, Richard (1554?- 1600), 179. Hungarian language, the, 12. i- as a prefix to the participle, 387-390. Icelandic tongue, the, 9. Imperative mode, the, 156, 303, 440. Indefinite pronouns, 299, 300. Indian branch of Indo-Euro- pean, 3. 484 Index to Subjects and Persons. Indicative mode, the, 168, 169, 1 74, 3°3- Indo-European family of lan- guages, I-II. Indo-European inflections, 194- 198. Indo-Germanic. See Indo- European. Infinitive, the, 303, 442-446; the gerundial infinitive, 443- 445; not preceded by to, 444; the past infinitive fol- lowing a past tense, 445, 446. Inflection in English, loss of, 85. 94-99, 193- Ingulph's History, 52. Instrumental case, the, 197, 198, 209, 257, 258, 261, 290. Interrogative Pronouns, the, 289-293. Iranian branch of Indo-Euro- pean, 4. Irish tongue, the, 5. Irregular Plurals of the Noun, 222-225, 229-240. Italic branch of Indo-Euro- pean, 6. Italian language, the, 6, 175. James I. of England (r. 1603- 1625), 135. James I. oi Scotland (r. 1424- 1437), 135, 43«- Johnson, Dr. Samuel (1709- 1784), 181, 182; quoted, ( 59. Jonsun, Ben (i573?-io37), 167, 301, 381,410, 412, 423, 424; quoted, 29 1, 301, 409, 412, 464. Jutes, the, 22. Kent, kingdom of, 22, 41. Kentish dialect, the, 26, 123. Kyd, Thomas (i557 ?-» 595 ?)» his " Spanish Tragedy " quoted, 292. Ladino speech, the, 7. Langland's " Piers Plowman," 66,69,279,333,438; quoted, 67, 92, 170, 410. Latimer, Hugh ( 14S5 ?-i 555), quoted, 450. Latin language, the, 6, 197. Latin element in English, 20, 37, 38,40-43, 105, 145, 175- 177, 179. Laws and law proceedings in English, 64-66, 79, 80. Layamon's "Brut," 89, 103, 281. Lettish tongue, the, 4. Lindsay, Sir David (1490- .1555), L56- Lithuanic speech, the, 4. Lodge, Thomas (1558?-! 625), quoted, 274, 455. Longfellow, Henry W. (1S07- 1882), quoted, 323, 348. Low 1'rankish, the, IO, 196. Low German tongues, the, 10. Low Germanic group of Teu- tonic languages, 10, 12, 196. Mandeville, Sir John, 69. Marlowe, Christopher (1564- 1 593), 4 l »°ted, 274,275, 34S, 455- Manx tongue, the, 6. Matthew of Westminster, 56. Mercia, kingdom of, 23. Mercian dialect, the, 26, 122. Mid. lie English period, the, 87, 206. Midland dialect of English, 92, 1 18-120, 122, 123, 128, 130- 134, 138, 139, 168, 206. Index to Subjects and Persons. 485 Midland dialect, East, 122, 124, 133- Midland dialect, West, 122, I3I-I33- Milton, John (1 608-1674), 167, 179, 269, 354, 381; quoted, 320, 347, 389. Modern English period, 87, 161-189. Moeso-Gothic tongue, the, 9. More, SirThomas(i48o-i535), quoted, 277, 337, 455, 475. Netherlandish speech, the, 10, 196. Nominative case, 197, 198,209, 217, 218. 220-222. Normandy, province of, 49, 50, 58, 60, 73-75. Norman-trench, the, 49, 50, 102, 103. Norman-French speech, the, 67, 73. 74. 85. Norse, the Old, 9, 37, 45, 46, 83, 196, 198, 199, 201, 204. Northern dialect of English, 86, 1 17-122, 123-130, 133, 134, I 37~ I 39. 168, 206. Northumbria, kingdom of, 23. Northumbrian dialect, the, 26, 2 7. 3°. 31. 46, 95. "5. I2J . 125, 128. Norwegian tongue, the, 9. Noun, the, 29, 96, 163, 209-240. Number, 198, 209, 242, 401. See Singular Dual, Plural. Objective case, 267, 268. Ohthere, 33. Old English period, the, 87- 105, 206. Old Saxon tongue, the, 10, 196. Ordericus Vitalis (1075-1144), 54- Ormulum, the, 88, 103. Orthography, English, 180- 182. Participle, past, of the strong conjugation, 387-400 ; with prefix ge, y, or i, 387-390 ; dropping or retention of final -en, 389-393; intrusion of preterite into past participle, 393-398; weak verbs assum- ing strong past participial forms, 397-399. Participle, past, of the weak conjugation, 400, 401 ; drop- ping of final -it, 401. Participle, present, 446; partici- ples, compound present and past, 447. Pecock, Reginald (1390?- 1460?), quoted, 445. Peele, George (i553?-i 598?), quoted, 291, 455, 471. Pepys, Samuel (1632- 1 703), quoted, 299, 337. Persian language, the, 4. Personal endings, assumed ori- gin of, 401-403; disappear- ance of, 403. Personal pronouns, the, 97, 150, 164, 263-289; confusion of nominative and objective, cases of, 271-275. Persons, 401-404; first person singular, 408; second per- son singular, 408; third per- son singular, 407, 409, 410; persons of the plural, 406, 407, 410-414. Piatt Deutsch, the, 10. Plural of the noun, 96, 146, 148-150, 152, 215, 216, 220- 226, 229-240. Polish tongue, the, 4. 486 Index to Subjects and Persons. Pope, Alexander (1688-1744), 282, 426, 429; quoted, 439. Porter, Thomas (about 1670); quoted, 337, 45 '• Portuguese language, the, 6. Possessive adjective pronouns, 275-277. Prefixes, 107, 108, 112, 113. Pronoun, the, 256-300. See Demonstrative, Indefinite, Interrogative, Personal, Re- flexive, ami Relative. Pronouns of address, 2S6-289. Provencal tongue, the, 6, 7. Purvey's Recension of the W'y- cliltite Translation of the Bible, 70. Raleigh, Sir Walter (1552- 161 8), 287, 288. Reflexive pronouns, 283-286. Relative pronouns, 293-299. Reuter, Fritz (1810-1874), 11. Rhaeto-Romanic tongue, the, 7. Rhotacism, 201. Richard I. (r. 1189-1199), 54. Riche, Barnabe, quoted, 282. Robert of Gloucester, 60,90; quoted, 60, 259. Robert Manning of Brunne (about 1320), 90. Rollo, Duke of Normandy, 49. Romaic language, the, 4. Roman * onqui si ol Britain, 18. Romanic or Romance Lan- guages, 6. Roumanian tongue, the, 7. Runes, 34. Russian language, the, 4. Sackville, Thomas, Earl of I Dorset (1536 1608 i, quoted, 331,456,46s. Sanscrit language, the, 3, 9, 195. Saxon Frontier, Count of the, 21. Saxon (or English) tongue, II, 27. Saxon, the Old, 10, 196. Saxons, the, II, 22-24, 2 7- Scandinavian branch of the Teutonic, 9. Scandinavian element in Eng- lish, 43-47, 127, 128. Scotch dialect of English, the, 133-139. 206- Scythian family, the, 12. Semitic family of languages, the, n, 12. Shakspeare, William (1564- 1616), 167-169, 253, 354, 381, 384, 433; quoted, 166, 274, 286, 287, 289, 377, 409, 413. 443. 45 'i 45°' 4<"'5. 475- Slavonic or Slavo-1 ,ettic branch of Indo-European, 4, 7. Southern dialei I of English, 86, 118, 122, 123-130, 168, 206. Spanish language, the, 6, 175. Spenser, Edmund ('553? - I.S99). 3 6 4. 4'2; quoted, 320, 322, 468. Steele, Sir Richard (1671- 1729); quoted, 297. Subjunctive mode, the, 16S, 171, 3°3. 415. 44'- s, 107, 108, 1 1 5. Superlatives used of two in comparison, 252. Sussex, kingdom of, 22. Synonymous words in English, 1 12. Swedish tongue, the, 9. Sweyn, 44. Swinburne, Algernon Charles I I843-), quoted, 252. Index to Subjects and Persons. 487 Tartaric family of languages, 1 2. Tennyson, Alfred (1809-1892), 426, 429. Tense, 404; the present, 303, 404-416; contracted present forms, 414; the preterite, J 45> 3°3- 4i6; preterite of weak conjugation, 416-418; preterite of the strong con- jugation, 418-433; double forms of the preterite in .Modern English, 420-428; the perfect, 99,434; the plu- perfect, 434; the future, 99, 432; the future-perfect, 433. "Testament of Love, The," 75. Teutonic branch of Indo-Euro- pean, 8-1 1, 12, 194-205. Teutonic Conquest of Britain, 20. Thomson, James ( 1 700-1748), 412. Trevisa, John of, 61; quoted, 63, 66, 118. Turanian family of languages, 12. Turkish language, the, 12. Udall, Nicholas (1506-1564), comedy of "Ralph Roister I )iistcs," quoted, 464. I'llilas, 9. Verb, the, 98, 151, 153, 155, 167-174, 301 II. Verbs, irregular, 466-476. Verbs, preterite-present, 452- 466. Verb, the strong, 98, 153-155, 303-355; Class I., 313-319. 35'; < lass II., 319^323; (lass III., 323-331, 351; Class IV., 331-332, 351; Class V., 334-339, 351; Class V 1 -.339-344, 35 1 ; Class VII., 344-348. Veil is, strong, losses of, in English, 349; number of, in English, 349, 351; ex- hibiting weak forms, 350, 352. Verb, the substantive, 469- 476. Verb, the weak, 99, 153-155, 303-312, 349-386.. Verbs, irregular weak, 361- 386; with preterite termina- tions -ed ox -t, 362-367, 372- 375; with same forms throughout, 367-372; with shortened stem-vowel, 375— 382; with original vowel variation, 382-385; with or- thographic variations, 386. Vercelli B< 10k, the, 32. Vocabulary of English, 101- 114, 142, 144, 162-164, 175- 180. Voice, the active, 302; the middle, 303; the passive, r 169-173, 303,448-452. \ owel-change (jiblant), 202. Vowel-modification {umlaut), 203-205. Vowel-variation, 202. Wales, North, 25, 117. Wales, West, 25. Wallis, |olm ( 1616-1703), 381, 3°3- Waller de Biblesworth (about 1270), 56. Webster, John, 167; quoted, 274. 377- Wedmore, Peace of, 44. Welsh tongue, the, 5, 18, 19, 24. Wessex, kingdom of, 22, 25, 44- 488 Index to Subjects and Persons. West Germanic division of the Teutonic, 8, 9. West Midland dialect, the, 122, I3I-133. West-Saxon dialect, the, 26, 27, 30, 31, 46, 83, 93, 1 1 5-1 1 7, 122, 128, 208. William I., the Conqueror (r. 1066-1087), 50, 54. William of Malmesbury (1095?- "43?)> "7- Wycherley, William (1640- 1715), quoted, 275. Wycliffe % John (1324 7-1384), 70; Wycliffite version of the Scriptures, ^y, quoted, 280, 292, 473; revised by Purvev, 70. Wyntoun, Andrew (about 1420), I3S» !36. y-, as a prefix to the participle, 387-3yo- Zend, the, 4. INDEX TO WORDS AND PHRASES. ABBREVIATIONS. a. = adjective. pers. = personal. adv. = adverb. phr. = phrase. af = affix. pi. = plural. art. = article. pp. = past participle. comp. = comparative degree. p. pres. = present participle. defec. = defective. poss. = possessive. demon. = demonstrative. /»■■ = pronoun. end. = ending. pref = prefix. gen. = genitive. prep. = preposition. ger. = gerund. pres. = present. imp. = imperative. sing. = singular. imper. = impersonal. superl. = superlative. ind. = indicative. V. = verb. indef. = indefinite. v.-phr. = verb-phrase. inf. = infinitive. v.pret.pres = preterite-present inter j. = interjection. verb. interrog = interrogative. vs. = strong verb. irreg. = irregular. vw. = weak verb. n. = noun. vs. vw. = verb, strong and neg. = negative. weak. num. = numeral. vs(viv). = verb now strong, P- = participle. originally weak. pass. = passive. vw(vs). = verb now weak, per. = person. originally strong. Foreign words and Anglo-Saxon words are printed in Italics. The Anglo-Saxon originals, when not given, can be found under the Modern English words derived from them. 489 49Q Index to Words and PJirascs. a, pr. pers., 269. a, prep., 172. abide, vs. vw., 313, 315, 350, 394; abode (n), //., 315; abidden, abid,//., 315, 394. -able, suf., 113. ache, vw{vs) ., 343. anig. a., 204. agan, v. pret. pres., 453, 454. aged, a., 360. ago, agone, a., 469. -al, suf., 113. aller, alther, 'of all,' a. gen. pi., 277. an, art. indef., 299, 300. an, num., 204. an, pr. indef., 204, 299. -an, n. pi. end., 148, 212. -an, inf. end., 94, 442. -and(e), end. p. pres., 446, 447. anti-, pre/., 1 12. any, a., 204. apparatus, »., 238. arc, pres.pl., 46, 168,470. assen, «. />/., 223. asshen, ;/. />/., 223. avon, n., 39. awake, vs. vw., 341. awake, a., 341. bad, a., 253; baddcr, baddest, 253- bake, vw(vs)., 343; bakcn, PP> 344- ban, 7T ( '(r'.f)., 346. band, ;/., 202. bard, n., 39. bare,/>;v/., 332. bark, vw{vs)., 331. be, .-'. irreg.,46, 167, 168, 172, 173. 434. 435- 449. 45°> 4^9- 476; ben, T,d pc- is. sing., 471 ; be, //., 474; there be, phr., 471. bear, vs., 332, 391, 399, 430 ; beared, prct., 352; bare, pret., 332. beat, vs., 345, 390, 393. become, vs., 449, 450. bede(n), 'to offer,' vs., 321, 338. ' bee, n., 148, 223, 224. beef, 71., in. been, n.pl., 148, 223. begen, num., 265. begin, vs., 202, 391, 395, 396, 424, 425, 436; began, //., 396; begunnen, //., 391. behave, vw., 385 ; behad, pret., 386. being built, the house is, phr.; being reaped, the field is, phr., 451. bell, ' to roar,' vw(vs)., 330. ben, n., 39. bend, 771'., 366. beon, v. irreg., 170, 449, 450, 469, 474. beorg, n., 42. bequeathe, V7c(vs)., 339. bereave, vw., 379, 381; be- reaven, //., 398, 399. beseech, vw., 127, 385; be- seeched, pret., 385. bestead, vw., 371. bet, vw., 372, 373. betide, vw., 376, 378; betided, pret., 378. between you and f, phr., 165. bid, vs., 335, 337, 393, 425, 444; bid, //., 337; bade, ./A. 337; bit, '1)1,15,' 414. bidde(n), 'to ask,' vs., 321, 337- bide, vw. vs., 313, 314, 315, 342, 394; bid, pret., 314. bind, vs., 324, 326, 427, 442; bounden, pp., 330, 390. Index to Words and Phrases. 491 biscop, n., 42; biscop-rice, n., 42. bishop, «., 42; bishopric, ;/., 42. bite, vs., 313, 392; bot, bote, pret., 314. black, a.; v. ; 11., 1 1 3. bleed, wy., 376. blend, vw., 366. bless, otc, 364. blind, a., 243-246, 249. blow (of wind, etc.), vs., 345, 392; blowed, pret., 354. blow, 'to bloom,' vs., 345, 392. bbchus, n., 109. bond, »., 202. born 1 ., borne} ^'399. bot(e),/;v/., 314. boughten, //., 398. bound, a., 128. bounden, a., 330, 390. bow, vw{vs)., 322. brace, «., 231. braid, vw(vs)., 331. break, w., 332, 333, 393, 429, 430; brake, pret., 332, 430; broke, pp., m, 429. breeches, ;/., 232. breed, vw., 376. brethren, 11. pi., 129, 149, 234, 235- brew, vw(vs)., 322. bring, vw., 306, 382. broad, a., 249. &r 333; comen, pp., m, 391 ; comand, p. pres., 447. con, zw., 458. conne(n), 'to be able,' v. pret. pres., 458. consummate, pp., 401. coren, pp., 320. cost, vw., 371. coud or couth, //., 458. coude orcouthe, pret.,4$j, 458. could, pret., 201, 457, 458. couple, ;/., 231. cousin-german, //., 105. cow. 149, 200, 232, 236. create,//., 401. creep, vw(vs)., 322, 380; crope, pret., 322; cropen, PP; 32 2. crope, pret.; cropen, //., 322. 1 row, vs. vw., 345, 350, 396; crown,//., 345, 396. crowd, vw{ vs)., 322. cu, n., 232, 236. cunnan, v. pret. pres., 457. curse, z/7w., 364. cut, vw., 371, 372, 398; cutted, pret., 372; cutten,//., 398. cwetSan, vs., 338. O"^. n -> 215. -d, /;v/. ^« 305. 35 6 > 436-440, 45'. 466; doth, pres. pi., 414, 466. dogma, ;;., 147, 237; dog- mata, ;/. //., 147, 237. -limn, snf., 10S. doughtren, 11. pi, 149, 152,234. Index to Words and Phrases. 493 dove, pre/., 323. down, n., 42. dozen, n., 231. drag, vw(vs)., 343. drave, preL, 431. draw, vs., 340, 341, 342, 343, 392; droh, <\xo\\,pret., 341 ; drawed, pret., 146, 352. dread, wv(vs)., 346, 360, 367; dredde, pret., 367; dread, />'., 394; drunk- en, pp., 33°. 390. drive, vs., 99, 202, 306, 313, 314, 391, 418, 420, 431; drave, pret., 431; driv, pret., 314; drove,//., 395. druid, n., 39. drunken, pp., 330, 390. dun, n., 42. dung, pret. and //>., 329. durran, v. pret. pres., 459. durst, pret., 459. dwell, fit'., 366. -e, a. pi. end., 151. -e, n. pi. end., 150, 215, 224. -e, v. end., 119, 151, 152, 153, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 443, 444. eage, n., 211, 212. ear, 'to plough,' m, 175, 357, 404,405, 417, 418, 440. eat, vs., 335, 339, 393, 395, 425 ; eat, pp., 337. -ed, suf., 108. -(e)d, pret. end., 126, 145, 146, 153. 359-361, 366, 3«7- -ede, pret. end., 357-359, 3 6 3> 375- -ede, suf., 108. effluvia, n. pi., 239. egg, n., 160, 235; eyren, //., 160, 235. eghen, 'eyes,' n. pi., 130. elder, eldest, a. comp. and su- per I. , 151, 248, 249, 250. ellipsis, ;/., 237. 'em, pr. pers., 150, 267. -en, n. pi. end., 129, 130, 148, 222, 223. -en, inf. end., 94, 151, 442- 444. -en, v. end., 119, 151, 152, 174, 405,406, 410-413,415, 417, 418, 420, 421. -en, pp. end., 356, 387, 389- 400. end, «., 210, 213, 227. -ende, p. pres. end., 445, 446. ende, n., 210, 213, 220. -en(n)e,£W. end., 443, 444, 446. enough, a., 387. eode, pret., 467, 468. -er, suf., 108. -er "1 comp. and superl. suf, -est] 249-251. -ere, suf., 108. errata, n. pi., 239. -(e)s, gen. end., 126, 282. -(e)s, //. end. of n., 129, 130, 146, 148-150, 220, 223, 227. -(e)s, 2d per. pres. sing, end., 124, 406, 408, 409. -(e)s, 3d per. sing. pres. end., 119, 124, 126, 169, 406, 407, 409, 410. -(e)s, pres. plur. end., 128, 148-150, 174, 406, 411, 413. esk, n., 39. -{e)st, end. 2d per. v., 405, 406, 408, 409, 419, 420. 494 Index to Words and Phrases. -(e)th, end. of 3d per. pres. sing., 168, 169,405, 406, 407, 409, 410, 415. -(e)th, pres. plur. end., 119, 124, 128, 174, 405, 406, 407, 4 1 1 , 4 1 4, 4 1 5 ; //. imper. , 440. evil, a., 253. excellentest, a., super/., 251. exquisitest, a., super!., 251. eye, ;/., 211, 212. 214, 227. eyen, or eyne, n.pl., 148, 223, 2 33- eyren, 'eggs,' n.pl., 160, 235. fader, n., 220. fall, vs., 345, 392. falsehood, n., 109. fanatical, a., 105. fare, vw(vs)., 343. farther, farthest, a., comp. and super/., 254. father, ;/., 200, 220. fathom, ;/., 231. feed, vw., 376. feel, via., 379, 444. fefor, n., 42. fele, 'many,'/;', iiulef., 299. /*w, ' far,' adv., 254. ferre, ' farther,' a. comp., 254. ferrest, «. super/., 254. fiend, //., 200. fight, vs., 325, 330, 427; foughten,^/., 330, 390, Wl, ■'■•'■. 153. 357. 35 s - 3 6l > 362. find, r .., 324, 326. fish, ;/., 199. fix, 77i'., 364. fixen, ;/., 127. flang, pre/.. 326, 424. (lay, vw(vs)., 343, 341; llain, PP; 344-1 flea, //., 223. flee, 7-rr., 321, 322, 380. fleen, n. pi., 223. fleet, vwlvs')., 322. fling, vs., 326, 351, 39i,424- flite, 'to scold,' vw(vs)., 318. float, vw(vs~)., 322. flon, ;/. //., 223. flow, vw{vs~)., 107, 346; flown, /A. 347- flungen, //., 391. fly, vs., 319, 321, 391. foe, n. , 235; fon,//., 235. fold, , adv., 128. froren, frore, //., 320. -fui, sit/:, 10S. -full, suf., 108. further, furthest, a., comp. and super/., 254. Index to Words and Phrases. 495 gan, v. irreg., 467-469. gan, pret., 422, 423. gar, v w., 128. ge-,pre/., 387, 456. geld, vw., 366. genius, n., 238. genus, «., 147, 237. get, vs., 306, 335, 393, 431; gat,/;v/., 335, 336, 431. gewiss, a., 456. gild, viu., 366. gin, vs., 324, 342, 436 ; gan, 436, .438- gin, v. auxil. ; gan, pret. sing., 422; gunne(n), gonne(n), pret. pi, 423, 437- 433- gird, vw., 365, 366. give, vs., 335, 337, 391. glide vw(vs)., 154, 309, 318; glod,/>-/>., 469. gonne(n). See gin. good, 0., 253; gooder, goodest, 253- goose, n., 152, 232, 233. got, I have, phr., 452. gotten, got, pp., 306, 335, 337, 393- grave, vw{vs)., 343, 344, 397; graven,//., 344, 397. greet, vw., 362, 367; grette, pret., 367. greet, 'to mourn,' vw(vs)., 347- grind, vs., 324, 326, 427. gripe, vw(vs)., 318. gross, n., 231. grow, vs., 345, 392, 419, 420, 421; growed, //-<>/., 309,310. gunne(n). See gin. ha., pr. pers., 269. -had, suf., 108. had as lief, 7'. -phr., 444. had better, 7'. -phr., 444; had liefer, v.-phr., 444; hadrather, v.-phr., 444; had sooner, v.-phr., 444. Had I wist, phr., 456. 'had ought,' v.-phr., 454. ham(e), ;;., 119. hang, ot. m, 345, 346, 350; heng, /;W., 34O; hong, pret., 346- hard, <*., 249. hatan, vs., 203, 348; //<7//V, pass., 449. have, 7W., 306, 385, 434, 435; hath and has, jd sing, pres., 410; hath, pres. pi., 414. haved(e), pret., 385. he, pr. pers., 98, 164, 264, 265, 266, 269, 270. he, it is, phr., 275. hear, vw., 357, 379. heat, vw., 377; heat,//., 377. heave, vw. vs., 340, 342, 350, 351; hove(n),//., 342. heed, iw., 356. help, m OT., 146, 155, 156, 325, 328, 330, 350, 351, 354; holp, pret., 325; holp(en), //■» 325. 330, 390. hem, ' them,' pr. pers., 98, 150, 266, 267, 270. hemself, ' themselves,' pr. re- flex., 285. heng, pret., 346. /■., 347> 397- hext, ' highest,' a. super/., 254. hi, 'they,' pr. pers., 98, 150, 264, 266. hidden, pp., 316, 317, 393, 398. hide, vs. m, 316, 317, 351, 377. 393. 398. high, a., 254. hight, vw{vs)., 346, 347, 348, 37°- him, pr. pers., 98, 164, 264, 266, 267, 268, 270, 273; it is him, phr., 165, 273. himself, himselven, pr. re/lex., _ 283-285. hindmost, a., 254. hires, 'hers,' pr.pers., 278. his, /;-. nii!s<. gen., 264, 270, 279, 2SI-2S.5. his,/;-, neut. gen., 94, 166, 167, 173, 264, 270, 276, 279, 2S1- 283. his'n, pr. pers., 281. hisself, pr. re/lex., 285. hit, ' it.' pr. pers., 9S, 166, 264, 268, 269, 270. hit, vw., 371. hltefdige, n., 219. hold, vs., 203, 345; holden, /A. 34". 392- holp, /;v/., 325. holpen, hol P» /A. 3 2 5> 33°. 390- honorablest, /., 1 3°' 22 4- house, ;/., 224; housen, //., 129, 149. house to let, phr., 445. how, adv., 293. hriSe, n., 42. hurt, vw., 371. hus, n., 149, 224. hwa, ' who,' /;-. interrog., 97, 127, 198, 289, 290. hwa, pr. indef., 299. hwcet, pr. interrog., 289, 290. /i7i>ifber,-pr. interrog., 289, 292. hwil, n., 221. hwile, pr. interrog., 289, 291. hypothesis, «., 237. X, pr. pers., 164, 268, 270, 273. i;pref., 387-391. 7 il aw, or it am /, phr., 275. /, it is, phr., 275. i-be, pp., 474. ic, pr. pers., 263, 268. ice-berg, ;/., 42. ich, pr.pers., 268. -ig, suf., 108, 204. ik, pr. pers., 268. i-lent, pp., 388. ilk, /r. demon., 262. ill, a., 128, 253. in, pnp., 172. -inde, /. pies, end., 446, 447. index, //.. 238. -ing, verbal n. end., 108, 172, 447- -ing(e),/. pres. end., 447. inmost, ze>., 379. lend, vw., 344, 366. lene(n), ' to lend,' vw., 344. lenger^ a. com p., 151, 248, 250. lese(n), 'to lose,' vs., 320, 321, 322. less, a. comp., 253; lesser, 253. dess, suf, 108, 109. let, vw(vs)., 346, 370, 440, 444. -lie, suf., 108. lie, vs., 335, 336, 337, 391, 400; lien, pp., 400. lie, 'to deceive,' v?o(vs)., 322. lief, liefer, adv., 444. lift, vw., 374; lift, pret. and /A. 374- light, ' to illuminate,' vw., 377, 378; light, 'to alight,' vw., 377, 378. dike, suf, 108. lin, n., 39. list, 7'7C, 4I5 \\\.,pret. and//., 377, 378. little, a., 253; littler, littlest, 253- load, vw., 344; loaden,//.,344. loan, «., 344. loan, zw., 344. long, a., 151, 248, 250. See lenger, comp. look, vw., 357, 358, 359, 361, 363, 404, 405, 417, 418, 440. lorn, a., 201, 320. lose, vw{vs)., 320, 321,322,380. louse, 71., 232, 233. lout, 'to bow,' V7(.'(vs)., 322. low, vw(vs)„ 347. dy, suf., 108. 49 8 Index to Words and PJirascs. -ma, suf. superl., 254. magan, mugan, v. pret. pres., 461. make, vw., 385, 444; maked(e), pret., 385. man, //., 146, 152, 200, 202, 204, 232, 233; mans, pi., 146, 233. man, pr. ind., 299. man, niou, 'intend,' v. pret. pres., 463,464; 111 nude, pret., 463- maun, v. pret. pres., 464. may, v. pret. pres., 461. me, pr. pers., 97, 164, 267, 273; it is me, phr., 165, 273. me, men,/;-, indef., 299. mean, vw., 379. meet, vw., 376. melt, vw{vs)., 309, 330, 331; molt, pret., 309, 331 ; molten, /Ai 331. 397- men, me, /;-. indef., 299. me self, /;-. reflex., 284. memorandum, ;/., 147, 238; //., memorandums or memo- randa. -mest, suf. super!., 254, 255. mete, vw(ys)„ 339. methinks, vw. imper., 383. mew, pret., 347. midmost, 2 5°> 2 5 1 ' mote(n), v. pret. pres., 462, 463- mother, n., 220. mought, pret., 462. moun, v. pret. pres., 464. mourn, vw{vs)., 331. mouse, ;?., 152, 204, 232, 233. mow, vw(vs)., 347,397; mew, pret., 347; mown, //., 347, 397- mowe(n), 'to be able,' v. pret. pres., 461. much, a., 253. mun, v. pret. pres., 464. in nut, n., 42. must, v. pret. pres., 462, 463. my, pr. See mine. myself, mvselve(n), pr. reflex., 284, 285, 286. -n, end., 95,405. See (f)«,420, 442, 443- neah, adv., 254. neat, n., 230. need, vw., 444, 465; need, 3d sing, pres., 466; needs, 3d sing, pres., 466. nerre, ' nearer,' a. comp., 254. -Hi's, 1 r ,„o suf., 108. -ins, J -ness, suf., 108. next, ' nearest/ a. super/., 254. night, //., 152, 200. nill, v. reg., 465. niste, 'knew not,' pret., 456. mm-, pre/'., 113. non, no, #/, n., 40. pollute,//., 401. pork, n., III. pound, »., 230. prove, zw., 399; proven, //., 399- put, vw., 371, 398; putten, //., 398. quair, n., 136. quilk,/r. inter rog. and tv/., 291. quit, vw., 372, 373. quod, fret., 339. quoth, /r^., 339. quotha, ' indeed,' interj., 269. radius, n., 238. raught, fret, and //., 155, 384. reach, vw., 155, 383, 384; raught, fret, and//., 155, 384. read, vw., 376. reave, m, 379, 381. rede, ' to advise,' vw{vs)., 347. reek, vw(vs)., 322. reeve, vs. vw., 340, 351. regol, n., 42. regollic, a., 42. rend, ww., 366. rid, vw., 369. ride, w., 313, 392, 395, 423, 425; rit, 'rides,' 414. ring, vs(vw)., 326, 351, 391, 425, 426, 429; rungen, //., 391. rinne(n), renne(n), ' to run,' vs., 329. rise, vs., 309, 310, 313, 314, 391; ris, fret., 314; rised, fret., 309, 310; rose, //>., 395> 396; rist, 'riseth,' 415. rive, vw\vs)., 318, 397; riven, //- 3i8, 397- rock-oil, ;?., 1 10. root, V7v(vs)., 347. ros, n., 40. rout, ' to snore,' v%v{vs)., 322. row, vw(vs)., 347. rue, vw(vs)., 322. run, vs., 324, 329, 428; run, fret., 329, 428. 5oo Index to Woi'ds and Phrases. -s, n. pi. end., 129, 150. See (e)s. -S, tense end., 407, 408, 409. See (e)s. sail, 71., 231. sain, pp., 398, 399. -sake, vs., 340, 342. sal, 'shall,' v. pret. pres., 119. sang, 'song,' n., 119. saw, vw., 353, 397; sawn, //>., 353- say, vw., 386, 398; sain, //., 398, 399- scathe vta^vs)., 343. sap, n., 211, 213. -scipe, suf., 108. score, «., 231. sculan, v. pret. pres., 460. se, sio pert, pr. demon., 257-260, 265, 266, 293, 298. seche(n), 'to seek,' vw., 127, 382. see, vs., 335, 337, 391; see, pret., 336, 337; seed, pret., 146. seek, vw., 127, 153, 362, 382. seethe, vw. vs., 319, 321, 350, 35 '. 392; pret., selled, 384. seistow, ' sayest thou,' v.-plu\, 402. self, a., 256, 283-286. sell, vw., 202, 304, 382; selled, pret., 384. send, 7W., 365, 366. seraph, seraphim, n., 239, 240. series, ;/., 237. set, vw., 336, 367, 368, 370, 375. sew, pret., 347. shake, vs., 340, 392; shaked, pret., 354; shook, //., 341, 395. 477- shall, v. pret. pres., 423, 432, 433,460; shule(n),shulle(n), //., 423, 460. shamrock, «., 39. shape, vw{vs)., 343, 344, 307; shapen, />/>., 344, 397. shar(e),/;v/., 332, 430. shave, vw(vs)., 343, 344, 397; shaven, pp., 344, 397. she, pr. pers., 164, 266, 270. shear, vs. vw., 332, 333, 350, 35 1 >39i,43°; shar(e), pret., 33 2 > 43°; shore . pret., 332, 333- shed, vcu(vs)., 347, 370. sheep, n., 146, 152, 230; sheeps, pi., 146, 152. shete(n), 'to shoot,' vs., 321. shew,/™?., 353, 355. shine, vs., 155, 313, 315, 316, 35°. 354, 394; shined, pret., J 55, 3 r 5> 3 l6 > 3545 shinen, pp., 316, 394. ship, n., 211, 212, 227. -ship, suf., 108. shoe, vw., 379. shoon, n. pi, 130, 148, 224. shoot, vs., 319, 321, 380, 391; shotten, //>., 381, 391. shove, vw(vs)., 322. show, vw., 352, 353, 355, 397; shew,/;v/., 353,355; shown, //■, 353- shred, vw., 373. shriek, mo., 384; shright, />/., 384- shrink, vs., 324, 424, 426; shrunken,//., 330, 390. shrive, vs. vw., 313, 315, 316, 35°> 39 1 • shul(len),/;r.f. />/., 423, 460. shut, vw., 370. sich, /;'. demon., 262. sigh, vw{vs)., 318. sin, pr., 276. sindon, said, pres. pi., 46, 469, 470. Index to Words and Phrases. 501 sing, vs., 304, 324, 390, 391, 404, 405, 406, 418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 426, 427, 429, 440; sungen, //., 390, 39i- sink, vs., 325, 424, 426, 429; sunken,//., 330, 390. sister, «., 149, 152, 220, 235; sistren or sustren, n. pi., 149, . 2 35- sit, vs., 107, 335, 336, 394; sat(e), pp., 337; sitten, sit, PP-, 337- 394; sit, 'sits,' 415. situate, pp., 401. slay, vs., 340, 392; sloh, slow, pre/., 341. sleep, vw(vs)., 203, 347, 380. slide, vs., 313, 314, 392; slod, pre/., 314. sling, vs., 325, 427. slink, vs., 325, 424. slip, vw(vs)., 318. slit, vw(vs)., 318, 372, 373. slod, pret., 314. smart, vw(ys)., 331. smite, vs., 310, 313, 314, 391, 393; smit, pret., 314; smited, pret., 310; smit,//., 393. sneak, vw(vs~)., 318. snow, vs. ? 352. soche, pr. demon., 262. sod, sodden, pret. and pp., 319, 35 1 - solstice, 7i., no. sovereignest, v. superl., 251. sow, vw(vs)., 347, 397; sew, pret., 347; sown,//., 347. span, vw(vs)., 347. speak, vs., 335, 393, 429, 431 ; spake, pret., 335, 336,431; spoke,//., 337, 429. species, n., 237. speed, vw., 376, 378; speeded, pret., 378. spell, vw., 364. spend, z'w., 366. spew, vw(vs)., 318. spin, vs., 325, 426; span,/;v/., 429; spinned./Tv/., 352. spit, wa/. w., 338, 351, 370, 372; spitted, pret., 372. split, vw., 372, 373. spoil, vw., 364. spread, vw., 367, 368, 370, 375. spring, vs., 325, 423, 425, 426, 429. sprout, vtv{vs)., 322. j spurn, vw(vs)., 331. squeeze, vw., 355; squoze, /«*» 355- -st, end., 405. See (.r)., 322. sulche, /r. demon., 262. sungen, //., 391. sunken, //., 330, 390. sun-stead, //., 1 10. su]), vw(vs)., 322. super-, pre/., 113. supreme, a., 252. sustren, n. pi. See sister. swang, //v/., 424, 429. swear, vs., 340, 342, 390, 392, 431; sware, pret., 342, 43'- sweat, Trio., 373, 398; sweaten, /A> 398, 399- * sweep, vw., 380. swell, vw(vs)., 330, 331, 397. swerve, vw{ys~)., 331. swiche, swilche, /r. demon., 262. swim, z/j., 325, 425, 426; swimmed, pret., 352. swine, ;;., ill, 230. swing, vs., 325, 424, 427. swang, pret., 424, 429. swollen,//., 331,397. swoop, vw(vs)., 347. swulche, pr. demon., 262. -t, pp. end., 356, 3S7, 400. take, vs., 340, 343, 392; took, AA> 341. 395- -t(e),/;v/. end., 153, 356, 361, 362, 363-367. 375- teach, vu>„ 155, 383; teached, pret., 155, 385. tear, vs., 202, 332, 391, 431; tare,//-,?/., 332,431. tell, vw., 46, 94, 153, 155, 382, 411 ; telled, pret., 155. -th, end., 403. See (J)th. than, prep. ?, 298. than whom, phr., 298. thank, vw., 361, 363. thar, ' need,' v. pret. pres., 463; thruste, pret., 463. that, pr. demon., 257-260. that, art., 259. that mm — that other, 260. that, pr. re/., 294-299; that — he, 'who,' 298; that — his 'whose,' 29S; that — him, 'whom,' 298; that — hem, ' whom,' ' which,' 298. the, adv., 258, 259. the, art., 105, 166, 259, 260; the own, 166, 167; thetone — the tother, 260. thee, /;-. pers., 164, 270, 273, 287-289. Index to Words and Phrases. 503 thee self, pr. reflex., 284. their, pr. pers., 150, 266, 270, 279, 280, 282. their'n, pr. pers., 280. theirselves, theirself, pr. re- flex, 285. them, pr. pers., 150, 266, 267, 270, 273. then, art., 259. thereof, adv., 166. these,/;-, demon., 261. they, pr.pers., 98, 150, 266, 270. thilke, /;-. demon., 262. thin(e), thi, /;-. pers., 269, 275, 277, 278, 280. thing, n., 150, 152, 224, 225, 230. think, vw., 304, 383. thinkestow, v.-phr., 402. thinks, in methinks, vw. imper., 383- this,/;-, demon., 261, 262. tho, ' those,' /;-. demon., 258. -thorp, sic/., 45. those,/;-, demon., 258. thou, pr. pers., 164, 270, 272, 287-289. thresh, vw(vs')., 331. thrive, vs. via., 146, 202, 316, 317, 318, 351, 354. throssen, //., 398. throw, vs., 345, 392; throvved, pret., 352. thrust, vw., 371, 398; thrusten, throssen, //., 398. thruste, pret., 463. -thwaite, snf., 45. thy, pr. pers. See thine. tide, vw., 376. til, prep., 119. to, prep., 119; with infiu., 443-447- toe, «., 148, 152. -toft, suf., 45. ton, n. pi., 148, 152, 224. t'one, the, phr., 260. tongue, «., 2ii, 212, 213, 214, 227. tooth, n., 200, 232, 233. -torp, suf., 45. t'other, the, phr., 260. trad(e),/^/., 335, 431. trans-, pre/., 113. *>*i n -» 39- tread, vs., 335, 393, 431 ; trad, P re *-> 335> 43 1 ; tread, /rf/., 381; trod,//., 337, 393, 429. tu, num., 265. tun, «., 231. tunge, n., 211, 212, 213, 214. /aw, num., 265. twelvemonth, ;?., 200. twit, w(ra)., 318,319. Sarf, v. pret. pres., 463. p>e, pr. demon. 294. /^«, feeos, pis, pr. demon., 261. p>ii, pr. pers., 263. ultra-, pre/., 113. uncouth, «., 201, 458. understand, vs., 308; under- stood,//., 477. undertook,//., 341. -ung, suf., 108, 447. unwittingly, adv., 456. \>&, pr. pers., 97, 164, 270, 273. us self, pr. reflex., 284. titan, inf., 441. veal, 71., III. vers, 'verses,' n. pi., 231. virtuoso, «., 238. virtuosest, a. superl., 251. vixen, «., 127. vortex, «., 238. vox, 71., 127. 504 Index to Words and Phrases. wade, vw(vs) ., 343. wake, vs. vw., 340, 343, 350, 354. 394; woke, pp., 341; waken, pp., 341, 394. walk, vw{ys)., 347. wan, pret., 429. ware, pret., 334, 431. warp, vw{vs")., 331. was, pret., 202, 472; were, 2d per. sing., 202, 472, 473; wert, 2d per. sing., 473; wast, 2d per. sing., 473; were, pi., 472 ; was, pi., 475 ; you 'was, 475, 476. was given a book, phr., 451 ; was told the truth, phr., 451. wash, vw(ys)., 343; washen, PP-, 344- wave, pret., 335, 431. wax,vw(vs)., 343, 344; waxen, />/>., 344, 397. we, pr. pers., 164, 263. wear, vs{vw)., 334, 351, 431; werede, pret., 334; ware, />-<''■, 334, 43 1- weave, z/j. vw., 335, 338, 350, 354- 39 2 » 43 1 ; waf , wave, />'^-, 335. 43 1 ; wove > PP-> 337. 392- wed, vw., 374. weep, vw(vs)., 347, 380, 381. weet, v. pret. pres., 455. weigh, vw(vs)., 339. wend, »z«., 366, 468; went, /Vv/., 366, 468; wended, pret., 366, 468. weorftan, vs., 170, 449, 450. were, /;•<.■/. .?;-. rf/., 294, 295, 297, 298, 299; the which, 294; which that, 295. whilk, pr. rel., 291. whilom, adv., 221. whiskey, n., 39. who, pr. interrog., 164, 165, 264, 289, 291. who, pr. rel., 295-298. who, pr. indef., 299; as who should say, phr., 299. whom, pr. interrog., 164, 165, 290, 291. whom, pr. rel., 295-298; than whom, 298. whose,/;', interrog., 290. whose, pr. rel., 295-29S; the whose, 295. whulc, pr. interrog. and rel., 291. why, adv., 293. wich, pr. interrog. and rel., 291. will, v., 432, 433, 464, 465. willan, v., 464. willy, nilly, phr., 465. win, vs., 324, 427, 429; wan, pret., 429. wind, vs., 324, 326, 329, 330, 427. wind, vw. vs., 329, 330. wis, I, phr., 457. wisse, wis, ' to show,' VW., 457- ' wist, pret., 454-456; pp., 456. wit, v. pret. pres., 454-457. See wot and wist, witan, v. pret. pres., 454, 456. witan, vs., 319. with-, pre/., 1 08. withdraw, withhold, vs., 108. Index to Words and Phrases. 505 wilhsay, vw., 108. withstand, vs., 108, 308. witting, p. pres., 456. wol, ' will,' v., 465. won, 'to dwell,' vw., 357, 358, 374- wonnot, wonot, won't, v. neg., 465- wont, vw., 373, 374. work, vw., 383, 385; worked, pret. , 385; wrought, pret., 385- worse, adj. comp., 253; worser, 253- worthe(n), vs., 170, 449, 450. wot, pres. tense, 454-456; wotted, pret., 455, 456; wot- ting,/./^., 455, 456. wound, n., 210, 227. wrang, pret., 424. wreak, vw{vs)., 339. wreathe, vw., 318, 319; wreath- en,//., 319. wring, vs., 324, 424, 427; wrang, pret., 424. write, vs., 314, 390, 392, 423, 425, 426, 427; writ, pret.. 314,423,425,425-427; writ, pp., 392; wrote,//., 395. writhe, vw(vs)., 318, 319; writhen, //., 319. wrought, pret., 383, 385. wuch, wulch, pr. interrog. and rel., 291. wnnd, n., 210, 219. wunian, vw., 357. y->pref., 387-39I. 45 6 > 457- -y, 5«/, 108, 204. y-be, ' been,' pp., 38S, 474. y-clept, 'called,'//., 389. y-do, ' done,' //., 388. ye,/r., 164, 165, 271,272, 273, 287-289. y', ye, ' the,' 35. yead, yeed, v. See _jv