Chapter VI: Verbs (3)

"Thou _cutst_ my head off with a golden axe,
And _smil'st_ upon the stroke that murders me."--_Shakspeare_.

OBS. 22.--Dr. Lowth supposes the verbal termination _s_ or _es_ to have come from a contraction of _eth_. He says, "Sometimes, by the rapidity of our pronunciation, the vowels are shortened or lost; and the consonants, which are thrown together, do not coalesce with one another, and are therefore changed into others of the same organ, or of a kindred species. This occasions a farther deviation from _the regular form_: thus, _loveth, turneth_, are contracted into _lov'th, turn'th_, and these, for easier pronunciation, _immediately_ become _loves, turns_."--_Lowth's Gram._, p. 46; _Hiley's_, 45. This etymology may possibly be just, but certainly such contractions as are here spoken of, were not very common in Lowth's age, or even in that of Ben Jonson, who resisted the _s_. Nor is the sound of sharp _th_ very obviously akin to flat _s_. The change would have been less violent, if _lov'st_ and _turnst_ had become _loves_ and _turns_; as some people nowadays are apt to change them, though doubtless this is a grammatical error: as,

"And wheresoe'er thou _casts_ thy view."
--_Cowley_.

"Nor thou that _flings_ me floundering from thy back."
--_Bat. of Frogs and Mice_, 1,123.

"Thou _sitt'st_ on high, and _measures_ destinies."
--_Pollok, Course of Time_, B. vi, 1, 668.

OBS. 23.--Possibly, those personal terminations of the verb which do not form syllables, are mere contractions or relics of _est_ and _eth_, which are syllables; but it is perhaps not quite so easy to prove them so, as some authors imagine. In the oldest specimens given by Dr. Johnson in his History of the English Language,--specimens bearing a much earlier date than the English language can claim,--even in what he calls "Saxon in its highest state of purity," both _st_ and _th_ are often added to verbs, without forming additional syllables, and without any sign of contraction. Nor were verbs of the second person singular always inflected of old, in those parts to which _est_ was afterwards very commonly added. Examples: "Buton ic wat thæt thu _hoefst_ thara wæpna."--_King Alfred_. "But I know that thou _hast_ those weapons." "Thæt thu _oncnawe_ thara worda sothfæstnesse. of tham the thu _geloered eart_."--_Lucæ_, i, 4. "That thou _mightest know_ the certainty of those things wherein thou _hast been instructed_."--_Luke_, i, 4. "And thu _nemst_ his naman Johannes."--_Lucæ_, i, 13. "And his name _schal be clepid_ Jon."--_Wickliffe's Version_. "And thou _shalt call_ his name John."--_Luke_, i, 13. "And he ne _drincth_ win ne beor."--_Lucæ_, i, 15. "He _schal_ not _drinke_ wyn ne sydyr."--_Wickliffe_. "And _shall drink_ neither wine nor strong drink."--_Luke_, i, 15. "And nu thu _bist_ suwigende. and thu _sprecan_ ne _miht_ oth thone dæg the thas thing _gewurthath_. fortham thu minum wordum ne _gelyfdest_. tha _beoth_ on hyra timan _gefyllede_."--_Lucæ_, i, 20. "And lo, thou _schalt_ be doumbe, and thou _schalt_ not mowe _speke_, til into the day in which these thingis _schulen be don_, for thou _hast_ not _beleved_ to my wordis, whiche _schulen be fulfild_ in her tyme."--_Wickliffe_. "And, behold, thou _shalt_ be dumb, and not able to speak, until the day _that_[247] these things _shall be performed_, because thou _believest_ not my words, which _shall be fulfilled_ in their season."--_Luke_, i, 20.

"In chaungyng of her course, the chaunge _shewth_ this,
Vp _startth_ a knaue, and downe there _falth_ a knight."
--_Sir Thomas More_.

OBS. 24.--The corollary towards which the foregoing observations are directed, is this. As most of the peculiar terminations by which the second person singular is properly distinguished in the solemn style, are not only difficult of utterance, but are quaint and formal in conversation; the preterits and auxiliaries of our verbs are seldom varied in familiar discourse, and the present is generally simplified by contraction, or by the adding of _st_ without increase of syllables. A distinction between the solemn and the familiar style has long been admitted, in the pronunciation of the termination _ed_, and in the ending of the verb in the third person singular; and it is evidently according to good taste and the best usage, to admit such a distinction in the second person singular. In the familiar use of the second person singular, the verb is usually varied only in the present tense of the indicative mood, and in the auxiliary _hast_ of the perfect. This method of varying the verb renders the second person singular analogous to the third, and accords with the practice of the most intelligent of those who retain the common use of this distinctive and consistent mode of address. It disencumbers their familiar dialect of a multitude of harsh and useless terminations, which serve only, when uttered, to give an uncouth prominency to words not often emphatic; and, without impairing the strength or perspicuity of the language, increases its harmony, and reduces the form of the verb in the second person singular nearly to the same simplicity as in the other persons and numbers. It may serve also, in some instances, to justify the poets, in those abbreviations for which they have been so unreasonably censured by Lowth, Murray, and some other grammarians: as,

"And thou their natures _knowst_, and _gave_ them names,
Needless to thee repeated."--_Milton_, P. L., Book vii, line 494.

OBS. 25.--The writings of the Friends, being mostly of a grave cast, afford but few examples of their customary manner of forming the verb in connexion with the pronoun _thou_, in familiar discourse. The following may serve to illustrate it: "Suitable to the office thou _layst_ claim to."--R. BARCLAY'S _Works_, Vol. i, p. 27. "Notwithstanding thou _may have_ sentiments opposite to mine."--THOMAS STORY. "To devote all thou _had_ to his service;"--"If thou _should come_;"--"What thou _said_;"--"Thou kindly _contributed_;"--"The epistle which thou _sent_ me;"--"Thou _would_ perhaps _allow_;"--"If thou _submitted_;"--"Since thou _left_;"--"_Should_ thou _act_;"--"Thou _may be_ ready;"--"That thou _had met_;"--"That thou _had intimated_;"--"Before thou _puts_" [putst];--"What thou _meets_" [meetst];--"If thou _had made_;"--"I observed thou _was_;"--"That thou _might put_ thy trust;"--"Thou _had been_ at my house."--JOHN KENDALL. "Thou _may be plundered_;"--"That thou _may feel_;"--"Though thou _waited_ long, and _sought_ him;"--"I hope thou _will bear_ my style;"--"Thou also _knows_" [knowst];--"Thou _grew_ up;"--"I wish thou _would_ yet _take_ my counsel."--STEPHEN CRISP. "Thou _manifested_ thy tender regard, _stretched_ forth thy delivering hand, and _fed_ and _sustained_ us."--SAMUEL FOTHERGILL. The writer has met with thousands that used the second person singular in conversation, but never with any one that employed, on ordinary occasions, all the regular endings of the solemn style. The simplification of the second person singular, which, to a greater or less extent, is everywhere adopted by the Friends, and which is here defined and explained, removes from each verb eighteen of these peculiar terminations; and, (if the number of English verbs be, as stated by several grammarians, 8000,) disburdens their familiar dialect of 144,000 of these awkward and useless appendages.[248] This simplification is supported by usage as extensive as the familiar use of the pronoun _thou_; and is also in accordance with the canons of criticism: "The _first_ canon on this subject is, All words and phrases which are remarkably harsh and unharmonious, and not absolutely necessary, should be rejected." See _Campbell's Philosophy of Rhetoric_, B. ii, Ch. ii, Sec. 2, Canon Sixth, p. 181. See also, in the same work, (B. hi, Ch. iv, Sec. 2d,) an _express defence_ of "those elisions whereby the sound is improved;" especially of the suppression of the "feeble vowel in the last syllable of the preterits of our regular verbs;" and of "such abbreviations" as "the eagerness of conveying one's sentiments, the rapidity and ease of utterance, necessarily produce, in the dialect of conversation."--Pages 426 and 427. Lord Kames says, "That the English tongue, originally harsh, is at present much softened by dropping many _redundant consonants_, is undoubtedly true; that it is not capable of being further mellowed without suffering in its force and energy, will scarce be thought by any one who possesses an ear."--_Elements of Criticism_, Vol. ii, p. 12.

OBS. 26.--The following examples are from a letter of an African Prince, translated by Dr. Desaguillier of Cambridge, England, in 1743, and published in a London newspaper: "I lie there too upon the bed _thou presented_ me;"--"After _thou_ left me, in thy swimming house;"--"Those good things _thou presented_ me;"--"When _thou spake_ to the Great Spirit and his Son." If it is desirable that our language should retain this power of a simple literal version of what in others may be familiarly expressed by the second person singular, it is clear that our grammarians must not continue to dogmatize according to the letter of some authors hitherto popular. But not every popular grammar condemns such phraseology as the foregoing. "I improved, Thou _improvedst_, &c. This termination of the second person preterit, on account of its harshness, _is seldom used_, and especially in the irregular verbs."--_Harrison's Gram._, p. 26. "The termination _est_, annexed to the preter tenses of verbs, is, at best, a very harsh one, when it is contracted, according to our general custom of throwing out the _e_; as _learnedst_, for _learnedest_; and especially, if it be again contracted into one syllable, _as it is commonly pronounced_, and made _learndst._ * * * I believe a writer or speaker would have recourse to any periphrasis rather than say _keptest_, or _keptst_. * * * Indeed this harsh termination _est_ is _generally quite dropped in common conversation_, and sometimes by the poets, in writing."--_Priestley's Gram._, p. 115. The fact is, it never was added with much uniformity. Examples: "But like the hell hounde _thou waxed_ fall furious, expressing thy malice when _thou_ to honour _stied_."--FABIAN'S CHRONICLE, V. ii, p. 522: in _Tooke's Divers._, T. ii, p. 232.

"Thou from the arctic regions came. Perhaps
Thou noticed on thy way a little orb,
Attended by one moon--her lamp by night."
--_Pollok_, B. ii, l. 5.

"'So I believ'd.'--No, Abel! to thy grief,
So thou _relinquish'd_ all that was belief."
--_Crabbe, Borough_, p. 279.

OBS. 27.--L. Murray, and his numerous copyists, Ingersoll, Greenleaf, Kirkham, Fisk, Flint, Comly, Alger, and the rest; though they insist on it, that the _st_ of the second person can never be dispensed with, except in the imperative mood and some parts of the subjunctive; are not altogether insensible of that monstrous harshness which their doctrine imposes upon the language. Some of them tell us to avoid this by preferring the auxiliaries _dost_ and _didst_: as _dost burst_, for _burstest; didst check_, for _checkedst._ This recommendation proceeds on the supposition that _dost_ and _didst_ are smoother syllables than _est_ and _edst_; which is not true: _didst learn_ is harsher than either _learnedst_ or _learntest_; and all three of them are intolerable in common discourse. Nor is the "_energy_, or _positiveness_," which grammarians ascribe to these auxiliaries, always appropriate. Except in a question, _dost_ and _didst_, like _do, does_, and _did_, are usually signs of _emphasis_; and therefore unfit to be substituted for the _st, est_, or _edst_, of an unemphatic verb. Kirkham, who, as we have seen, graces his Elocution with such unutterable things, as "_prob'dst, hurl'dst, arm'dst, want'dst, burn'dst, bark'dst, bubbl'dst, troubbl'dst_," attributes the use of the plural for the singular, to a design of avoiding the raggedness of the latter. "In order to avoid the disagreeable harshness of sound, occasioned by the frequent recurrence of the termination _est, edst_, in the adaptation of our verbs to the nominative _thou_, a _modern innovation_ which substitutes _you_ for _thou_, in familiar style, has generally been adopted. This innovation contributes greatly to the harmony of our colloquial style. _You_ was formerly restricted to the plural number; but now it is employed to represent either a singular or a plural noun."--_Kirkham's Gram._, p. 99. A modern innovation, forsooth! Does not every body know it was current four hundred years ago, or more? Certainly, both _ye_ and _you_ were applied in this manner, to the great, as early as the fourteenth century. Chaucer sometimes used them so, and he died in 1400. Sir T. More uses them so, in a piece dated 1503.

"O dere cosyn, Dan Johan, she sayde,
What eyleth _you_ so rathe to aryse?"--_Chaucer_.

Shakspeare most commonly uses _thou_, but he sometimes has _you_ in stead of it. Thus, he makes Portia say to Brutus:

"_You_ suddenly arose, and walk'd about,
Musing, and sighing, with _your_ arms across;
And when I ask'd _you_ what the matter was,
_You_ star'd upon me with ungentle looks."--_J. Cæsar_, Act ii, Sc. 2.

OBS. 28.--"There is a natural tendency in all languages to throw out the rugged parts which improper consonants produce, and to preserve those which are melodious and agreeable to the ear."--_Gardiner's Music of Nature_, p. 29. "The English tongue, so remarkable for its grammatical simplicity, is loaded with a great variety of dull unmeaning terminations. Mr. Sheridan attributes this defect, to an utter inattention to what is easy to the organs of speech and agreeable to the ear; and further adds, that, 'the French having been adopted as the language of the court, no notice was taken, of the spelling or pronunciation of our words, until the reign of queen Anne.' So little was spelling attended to in the time of Elizabeth, that Dr. Johnson informs us, that on referring to Shakspeare's will, to determine how his name was spelt, he was found to have written it himself [in] no _less_ [fewer] than three different ways."--_Ib._, p. 477. In old books, our participial or verbal termination _ed_, is found written in about a dozen different ways; as, _ed, de, d, t, id, it, yd, yt, ede, od, ud_. For _est_ and _eth_, we find sometimes the consonants only; sometimes, _ist_ or _yst, ith_ or _yth_; sometimes, for the latter, _oth_ or _ath_; and sometimes the ending was omitted altogether. In early times also the _th_ was an ending for verbs of the third person plural, as well as for those of the third person singular;[249] and, in the imperative mood, it was applied to the second person, both singular and plural: as,

"_Demith_ thyself, that demist other's dede;
And trouthe the shall deliver, it's no drede."--_Chaucer_.

OBS. 29.--It must be obvious to every one who has much acquaintance with the history of our language, that this part of its grammar has always been quite as unsettled as it is now; and, however we may wish to establish its principles, it is idle to teach for absolute certainty that which every man's knowledge may confute. Let those who desire to see our forms of conjugation as sure as those of other tongues, study to exemplify in their own practice what tends to uniformity. The best that can be done by the author of a grammar, is, to exhibit usage, as it has been, and as it is; pointing out to the learner what is most fashionable, as well as what is most orderly and agreeable. If by these means the usage of writers and speakers cannot be fixed to what is fittest for their occasions, and therefore most grammatical, there is in grammar no remedy for their inaccuracies; as there is none for the blunders of dull opinionists, none for the absurdities of Ignorance stalled in the seats of Learning. Some grammarians say, that, whenever the preterit of an irregular verb is like the present, it should take _edst_ for the second person singular. This rule, (which is adopted by Walker, in his Principles, No. 372,) gives us such words as _cast-edst, cost-edst, bid-dedst, burst-edst, cut-tedst, hit-tedst, let-tedst, put-tedst, hurt-edst, rid-dedst, shed-dedst_, &c. But the rule is groundless. The few examples which may be adduced from ancient writings, in support of this principle, are undoubtedly formed in the usual manner from regular preterits now obsolete; and if this were not the case, no person of taste could think of employing, on any occasion, derivatives so uncouth. Dr. Johnson has justly remarked, that "the chief defect of our language, is ruggedness and asperity." And this defect, as some of the foregoing remarks have shown, is peculiarly obvious, when even the regular termination of the second person singular is added to our preterits. Accordingly, we find numerous instances among the poets, both ancient and modern, in which that termination is omitted. See Percy's Reliques of Ancient Poetry, everywhere.

"Thou, who of old the prophet's eye _unsealed_."--_Pollok_.

"Thou _saw_ the fields laid bare and waste."--_Burns_.[250]

OBS. 30.--With the familiar form of the second person singular, those who constantly put _you_ for _thou_ can have no concern; and many may think it unworthy of notice, because Murray has said nothing about it: others will hastily pronounce it bad English, because they have learned at school some scheme of the verb, which implies that this must needs be wrong. It is this partial learning which makes so much explanation here necessary. The formation of this part of speech, form it as you will, is _central to grammar_, and cannot but be very important. Our language can never entirely drop the pronoun _thou_, and its derivatives, _thy, thine, thee, thyself_, without great injury, especially to its poetry. Nor can the distinct syllabic utterance of the termination _ed_ be now generally practised, except in solemn prose. It is therefore better, not to insist on those old verbal forms against which there are so many objections, than to exclude the pronoun of the second person singular from all such usage, whether familiar or poetical, as will not admit them. It is true that on most occasions _you_ may be substituted for _thou_, without much inconvenience; and so may _we_ be substituted for _I_, with just as much propriety; though Dr. Perley thinks the latter usage "is not to be encouraged."--_Gram._, p. 28. Our authors and editors, like kings and emperors, are making _we_ for _I_ their most common mode of expression. They renounce their individuality to avoid egotism. And when all men shall have adopted this enallage, the fault indeed will be banished, or metamorphosed, but with it will go an other sixth part of every English conjugation. The pronouns in the following couplet are put for the first person singular, the second person singular, and the second person plural; yet nobody will understand them so, but by their antecedents:

"Right trusty, and so forth--_we_ let _you_ to know
_We_ are very ill used by _you mortals_ below."--_Swift._

OBS. 31.--It is remarkable that some, who forbear to use the plural for the singular in the second person, adopt it without scruple, in the first. The figure is the same in both; and in both, sufficiently common. Neither practice is worthy to be made more general than it now is. If _thou_ should not be totally sacrificed to what was once a vain compliment, neither should _I_, to what is now an occasional, and perhaps a vain assumption. Lindley Murray, who does not appear to have used _you_ for _thou_, and who was sometimes singularly careful to periphrase [sic--KTH] and avoid the latter, nowhere in his grammar speaks of himself in the first person singular. He is often "the _Compiler_;" rarely, "the _Author_;" generally, "We:" as, "_We_ have distributed these parts of grammar, in the mode which _we_ think most correct and intelligible."--_Octavo Gram._, p. 58. "_We_ shall not pursue this subject any further."--_Ib._, p. 62. "_We_ shall close these remarks on the tenses."--_Ib._, p. 76. "_We_ presume no solid objection can be made."--_Ib._, p. 78. "The observations which _we_ have made."--_Ib._, p. 100. "_We_ shall produce a remarkable example of this beauty from Milton."--_Ib._, p. 331. "_We_ have now given sufficient openings into this subject."--_Ib._, p. 334. This usage has authority enough; for it was not uncommon even among the old Latin grammarians; but he must be a slender scholar, who thinks the pronoun _we_ thereby becomes _singular._ What advantage or fitness there is in thus putting _we_ for _I_, the reader may judge. Dr. Blair did not hesitate to use _I_, as often as ho had occasion; neither did Lowth, or Johnson, or Walker, or Webster: as, "_I_ shall produce a remarkable example of this beauty from Milton."--_Blair's Rhet._, p. 129. "_I_ have now given sufficient openings into this subject."--_Ib._, p. 131. So in Lowth's Preface: "_I_ believe,"--"_I_ am persuaded,"--"_I_ am sure,"--"_I_ think,"--"_I_ am afraid,"--"_I_ will not take upon _me_ to say."

OBS. 32.--Intending to be critical without hostility, and explicit without partiality, I write not for or against any sect, or any man; but to teach all who desire to know _the grammar_ of our tongue. The student must distinctly understand, that it is necessary to speak and write differently, according to the different circumstances or occasions of writing. Who is he that will pretend that the solemn style of the Bible may be used in familiar discourse, without a mouthing affectation? In preaching, or in praying, the ancient terminations of _est_ for the second person singular and _eth_ for the third, as well as _ed_ pronounced as a separate syllable for the preterit, are admitted to be generally in better taste than the smoother forms of the familiar style: because the latter, though now frequently heard in religious assemblies, are not so well suited to the dignity and gravity of a sermon or a prayer. In grave poetry also, especially when it treats of scriptural subjects, to which _you_ put for _thou_ is obviously unsuitable, the personal terminations of the verb, though from the earliest times to the present day they have usually been contracted and often omitted by the poets, ought still perhaps to be considered grammatically necessary, whenever they can be uttered, agreeably to the notion of our tuneless critics. The critical objection to their elision, however, can have no very firm foundation while it is admitted by some of the objectors themselves, that, "Writers _generally_ have recourse to this mode of expression, that they may avoid harsh terminations."-- _Irving's Elements of English Composition_, p. 12. But if writers of good authority, such as Pope, Byron, and Pollok, have sometimes had recourse to this method of simplifying the verb, even in compositions of a grave cast, the elision may, with tenfold stronger reason, be admitted in familiar writing or discourse, on the authority of general custom among those who choose to employ the pronoun _thou_ in conversation.

"But thou, false Arcite, never _shall_ obtain," &c.
--_Dryden, Fables_.

"These goods _thyself can_ on thyself bestow."
--_Id., in Joh. Dict._

"What I show, _thy self may_ freely on thyself bestow."
--_Id., Lowth's Gram._, p. 26.

"That thou _might_ Fortune to thy side engage."
--_Prior_.

"Of all thou ever _conquered_, none was left."
--_Pollok_, B. vii, l. 760.

"And touch me trembling, as thou _touched_ the man," &c.
--_Id._, B. x, l. 60.

OBS. 33.--Some of the Friends (perhaps from an idea that it is less formal) misemploy _thee_ for _thou_; and often join it to the third person of the verb in stead of the second. Such expressions as, _thee does, thee is, thee has, thee thinks_, &c., are double solecisms; they set all grammar at defiance. Again, many persons who are not ignorant of grammar, and who employ the pronoun aright, sometimes improperly sacrifice concord to a slight improvement in sound, and give to the verb the ending of the third person, for that of the second. Three or four instances of this, occur in the examples which have been already quoted. See also the following, and many more, in the works of the poet Burns; who says of himself, "Though it cost the schoolmaster some thrashings, I made an excellent English scholar; and, by the time I was ten or eleven years of age, I was a critic in substantives, VERBS, and particles:"--"But when thou _pours_;"--"There thou _shines_ chief;"--"Thou _clears_ the head;"--"Thou _strings_ the nerves;"--"Thou _brightens_ black despair;"--"Thou _comes_;"--"Thou _travels_ far;"--"Now _thou's turned_ out;"--"Unseen thou _lurks_;"--"O thou pale orb that silent _shines_." This mode of simplifying the verb, confounds the persons; and, as it has little advantage in sound, over the regular contracted form of the second person, it ought to be avoided. With this author it may be, perhaps, a Scotticism: as,

"Thou _paints_ auld nature to the nines,
In thy sweet Caledonian lines."--_Burns to Ramsay_.

"Thou _paintst old_ nature," would be about as smooth poetry, and certainly much better English. This confounding of the persons of the verb, however, is no modern peculiarity. It appears to be about as old as the use of _s_ for _th_ or _eth_. Spenser, the great English poet of the sixteenth century, may be cited in proof: as,

"Siker, _thou's_ but a lazy loord,
And _rekes_ much of thy swinke."--_Joh. Dict., w. Loord_.

OBS. 34.--In the solemn style, (except in poetry, which usually contracts these forms,) the second person singular of the present indicative, and that of the irregular preterits, commonly end in _est_, pronounced as a separate syllable, and requiring the duplication of the final consonant, according to Rule 3d for Spelling: as, I _run_, thou _runnest_; I _ran_, thou _rannest_. But as the termination _ed_, in solemn discourse, constitutes a syllable, the regular preterits form the second person singular by assuming _st_, without further increase of syllables: as, I _loved_, thou _lovedst_; not, "_lovedest_," as Chandler made it in his English Grammar, p. 41, Edition of 1821; and as Wells's rule, above cited, if literally taken, would make it. _Dost_ and _hast_, and the three irregular preterits, _wast, didst_, and _hadst_, are permanently contracted; though _doest_ and _diddest_ are sometimes seen in old books. _Saidst_ is more common, and perhaps more regular, than _saidest. Werest_ has long been contracted into _wert_: "I would thou _werest_ either cold or hot."--_W. Perkins_, 1608.[251] The auxiliaries _shall_ and _will_ change the final _l_ to _t_, and become _shalt_ and _wilt_. To the auxiliaries, _may, can, might, could, would_, and _should_, the termination _est_ was formerly added; but they are now generally written with _st_ only, and pronounced as monosyllables, even in solemn discourse. Murray, in quoting the Scriptures, very often charges _mayest_ to _mayst, mightest_ to _mightst_, &c. Some other permanent contractions are occasionally met with, in what many grammarians call the solemn style; as _bidst_ for _biddest, fledst_ for _fleddest, satst_ for _sattest_:

"Riding sublime, thou _bidst_ the world adore,
And humblest nature with thy northern blast."
--_Thomson_.

"Fly thither whence thou _fledst_."
--_Milton, P. L._, B. iv, l. 963.

"Unspeakable, who _sitst_ above these heavens."
--_Id., ib._, B. v, l. 156.

"Why _satst_ thou like an enemy in wait?"
--_Id., ib._, B. iv, l. 825.

OBS. 35.--The formation of the third person singular of verbs, is _now_ precisely the same as that of the plural number of nouns: as, _love, loves; show, shows; boast, boasts; fly, flies; reach, reaches_. This form began to be used about the beginning of the sixteenth century. The ending seems once to have been _es_, sounded as _s_ or _z_: as,

"And thus I see among these pleasant thynges
Eche care _decayes_, and yet my sorrow _sprynges_."--_Earl of Surry_.

"With throte yrent, he _roares_, he _lyeth_ along."--_Sir T. Wyat_.

"He _dyeth_, he is all dead, he _pantes_, he _restes_."--_Id._, 1540.

In all these instances, the _e_ before the _s_ has become improper. The _es_ does not here form a syllable; neither does the _eth_, in "_lyeth_" and "_dyeth_." In very ancient times, the third person singular appears to have been formed by adding _th_ or _eth_ nearly as we now add _s_ or _es_[252] Afterwards, as in our common Bible, it was formed by adding _th_ to verbs ending in _e_, and _eth_ to all others; as, "For he that _eateth_ and _drinketh_ unworthily, _eateth_ and _drinketh_ damnation to himself."--_1 Cor._, xi, 29. "He _quickeneth_ man, who is dead in trespasses and sins; he _keepeth_ alive the quickened soul, and _leadeth_ it in the paths of life; he _scattereth, subdueth_, and _conquereth_ the enemies of the soul."--_I. Penington_. This method of inflection, as now pronounced, always adds a syllable to the verb. It is entirely confined to the solemn style, and is little used. _Doth, hath_, and _saith_, appear to be permanent contractions of verbs thus formed. In the days of Shakspeare, both terminations were common, and he often mixed them, in a way which is not very proper now: as,

"The quality of mercy is not strained;
It _droppeth_, as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath: it is twice bless'd;
It _blesseth_ him that _gives_, and him that _takes_."
--_Merchant of Venice_.

OBS. 36.--When the second person singular is employed in familiar discourse, with any regard to correctness, it is usually formed in a manner strictly analogous to that which is now adopted in the third person singular. When the verb ends with a sound which will unite with that of _st_ or _s_, the second person singular is formed by adding _s_ only, and the third, by adding _s_ only; and the number of syllables is not increased: as, I _read_, thou _readst_, he _reads_; I _know_, thou _knowst_, he _knows_; I _take_, thou _takest_, he _takes_; I _free_, thou _freest_, he _frees_. For, when the verb ends in mute _a_, no termination renders this _a_ vocal in the familiar style, if a synæresis can take place. To prevent their readers from ignorantly assuming the pronunciation of the solemn style, the poets have generally marked such words with an apostrophe: as,

"Look what thy soul holds dear, imagine it
To lie the way thou _go'st_, not whence thou _com'st_."--_Shak_.

OBS. 37.--But when the verb ends in a sound which will not unite with that of _st_ or _s_, the second and third persons are formed by adding _est_ and _es_; or, if the first person end in mute _e_, the _st_ and _s_ render that _e_ vocal; so that the verb acquires an additional syllable: as, I _trace_, thou _tracest_, he _traces_; I _pass_, thou _passest_, he _passes_; I _fix_, thou _fixest_, he _fixes_; I _preach_, thou _preachest_, he _preaches_; I _blush_, thou _blushest_, he _blushes_; I _judge_, thou _judgest_, he _judges_. But verbs ending in _o_ or _y_ preceded by a consonant, do not exactly follow either of the foregoing rules. In these, _y_ is changed into _i_; and, to both _o_ and _i, est_ and _es_ are added without increase of syllables: as, I _go_, thou _goest_, he _goes_; I _undo_, thou _undoest_,[253] he _undoes_; I _fly_, thou _fliest_, he _flies_; I _pity_, thou _pitiest_, he _pities_. Thus, in the following lines, _goest_ must be pronounced like _ghost_; otherwise, we spoil the measure of the verse:

"Thou _goest_ not now with battle, and the voice
Of war, as once against the rebel hosts;
Thou _goest_ a Judge, and _findst_ the guilty bound;
Thou _goest_ to prove, condemn, acquit, reward."--_Pollok_, B. x.

In solemn prose, however, the termination is here made a separate syllable: as, I _go_, thou _goëst_, he _goëth_; I _undo_, thou _undoëst_, he _undoëth_; I _fly_, thou _fliëst_, he _fliëth_; I _pity_, thou _pitiëst_, he _pitiëth_.

OBS. 38.--The auxiliaries _do, dost, does_,--(pronounced _doo, dust, duz_; and not as the words _dough, dosed, doze_,--) _am, art, is,--have, hast, has_,--being also in frequent use as principal verbs of the present tense, retain their peculiar forms, with distinction of person and number, when they help to form the compound tenses of other verbs. The other auxiliaries are not varied, or ought not to be varied, except in the solemn style. Example of the familiar use: "That thou _may_ be found truly owning it."--_Barclay's Works_, Vol. i, p. 234.

OBS. 39.--The only regular terminations that are added to English verbs, are _ing, d_ or _e, st_ or _est, s_ or _es, th_ or _eth_[254] _Ing_, and _th_ or _eth_, always add a syllable to the verb; except in _doth, hath, saith_.[255] The rest, whenever their sound will unite with that of the final syllable of the verb, are usually added without increasing the number of syllables; otherwise, they are separately pronounced. In solemn discourse, however, _ed_ and _est_ are by most speakers uttered distinctly in all cases; except sometimes when a vowel precedes: as in _sanctified, glorified_, which are pronounced as three syllables only. Yet, in spite of this analogy, many readers will have _sanctifiest_ and _glorifiest_ to be words of four syllables. If this pronunciation is proper, it is only so in solemn prose. The prosody of verse will show how many syllables the poets make: as,

"Thou _diedst_, a most rare boy, of melancholy!"
--_Shak., Cymb._, Act iv, sc. 2.

"Had not a voice thus warn'd me: What thou _seest_,
What there thou _seest_, fair creature, is thyself."
--_Milton_, B. iv, l. 467.

"By those thou _wooedst_ from death to endless life."
--_Pollok_, B. ix, l. 7.

"Attend: that thou art happy, owe to God;
That thou _continuest_ such, owe to thyself"
--_Milton_, B. v, l. 520.

OBS. 40.--If the grave and full form of the second person singular must needs be supposed to end rather with the syllable _est_ than with _st_ only, it is certain that this form may be _contracted_, whenever the verb ends in a sound which will unite with that of _st_. The poets generally employ the briefer or contracted forms; but they seem not to have adopted a uniform and consistent method of writing them. Some usually insert the apostrophe, and, after a single vowel, double the final consonant before _st_; as, _hold'st, bidd'st, said'st, ledd'st, wedd'st, trimm'st, may'st, might'st_, and so forth: others, in numerous instances, add _st_ only, and form permanent contractions; as, _holdst, bidst, saidst, ledst, wedst, trimst, mayst, mightst_, and so forth. Some retain the vowel _e_, in the termination of certain words, and suppress a preceding one; as, _quick'nest, happ'nest, scatt'rest, rend'rest, rend'redst, slumb'rest, slumb'redst_: others contract the termination of such words, and insert the apostrophe; as, _quicken'st, happen'st, scatter'st, render'st, render'dst, slumber'st, slumber'dst_. The nature and idiom of our language, "the accent and pronunciation of it," incline us to abbreviate or "contract even all our regular verbs;" so as to avoid, if possible, an increase of syllables in the inflection of them. Accordingly, several terminations which formerly constituted distinct syllables, have been either wholly dropped, or blended with the final syllables of the verbs to which they are added. Thus the plural termination _en_ has become entirely obsolete; _th_ or _eth_ is no longer in common use; _ed_ is contracted in pronunciation; the ancient _ys_ or _is_, of the third person singular, is changed to _s_ or _es_, and is usually added without increase of syllables; and _st_ or _est_ has, in part, adopted the analogy. So that the proper mode of forming these contractions of the second person singular, seems to be, to add _st_ only; and to insert no apostrophe, unless a vowel is suppressed from the verb to which this termination is added: as, _thinkst, sayst, bidst, sitst, satst, lov'st, lov'dst, slumberst, slumber'dst_.

"And know, for that thou _slumberst_ on the guard,
Thou shalt be made to answer at the bar."--_Cotton_.

OBS. 41.--Ho man deserves more praise for his attention to English pronunciation, than John Walker. His Pronouncing Dictionary was, for a long period, the best standard of orthoëpy, that our schools possessed. But he seems to me to have missed a figure, in preferring such words as _quick'nest, strength'nest_, to the smoother and more regular forms, _quickenst, strengthenst_. It is true that these are rough words, in any form you can give them; but let us remember, that needless apostrophes are as rough to the eye, as needless _st_'s to the ear. Our common grammarians are disposed to encumber the language with as many of both as they can find any excuse for, and vastly more than can be sustained by any good argument. In words that are well understood to be contracted in pronunciation, the apostrophe is now less frequently used than it was formerly. Walker says, "This contraction of the participial _ed_, and the verbal _en_, is so fixed an idiom of our pronunciation, that to alter it, would be to alter the sound of the whole language. It must, however, be regretted that it subjects our tongue to some of the most hissing, snapping, clashing, grinding sounds that ever grated the ears of a Vandal; thus, _rasped, scratched, wrenched, bridled, fangled, birchen, hardened, strengthened, quickened_, &c. almost frighten us when written as they are actually pronounced, as _rapt, scratcht, wrencht, bridl'd, fangl'd, birch'n, strength'n'd, quick'n'd_, &c.; they become still more formidable when used contractedly in the solemn style, which never ought to be the case; for here instead of _thou strength'n'st_ or _strength'n'd'st, thou quick'n'st_ or _quick'n'd'st_, we ought to pronounce _thou strength'nest_ or _strength'nedst, thou quick'nest_ or _quick'nedst_, which are sufficiently harsh of all conscience."--_Principles_, No. 359. Here are too many apostrophes; for it does not appear that such words as _strengthenedest_ and _quickenedest_ ever existed, except in the imagination of certain grammarians. In solemn prose one may write, _thou quickenest, thou strengthenest_, or _thou quickenedst, thou strengthenedst_; but, in the familiar style, or in poetry, it is better to write, _thou quickenst, thou strengthenst, thou quickened, thou strengthened_. This is language which it is possible to utter; and it is foolish to strangle ourselves with strings of rough consonants, merely because they are insisted on by some superficial grammarians. Is it not strange, is it not incredible, that the same hand should have written the two following lines, in the same sentence? Surely, the printer has been at fault.

"With noiseless foot, thou _walkedst_ the vales of earth"--
"Most honourable thou _appeared_, and most
To be desired."--_Pollok's Course of Time_, B. ix, l. 18, and l. 24.

OBS. 42.--It was once a very common practice, to retain the final _y_, in contractions of the preterit or of the second person of most verbs that end in _y_, and to add the consonant terminations _d, st_, and _dst_, with an apostrophe before each; as, _try'd_ for _tried, reply'd_ for _replied, try'st_ for _triest, try'dst_ for _triedst_. Thus Milton:--

"Thou following _cry'dst_ aloud, Return, fair Eve;
Whom _fly'st_ thou? whom thou _fly'st_, of him thou art."
--_P. L._, B. iv, l. 481.

This usage, though it may have been of some advantage as an index to the pronunciation of the words, is a palpable departure from the common rule for spelling such derivatives. That rule is, "The final _y_ of a primitive word, when preceded by a consonant, is changed into _i_ before an additional termination." The works of the British poets, except those of the present century, abound with contractions like the foregoing; but late authors, or their printers, have returned to the rule; and the former practice is wearing out and becoming obsolete. Of regular verbs that end in _ay, ey_, or _oy_, we have more than half a hundred; all of which usually retain the _y_ in their derivatives, agreeably to an other of the rules for spelling. The preterits of these we form by adding _ed_ without increase of syllables; as, _display, displayed; survey, surveyed; enjoy, enjoyed_. These also, in both tenses, may take _st_ without increase of syllables; as, _display'st, display'dst_; _survey'st, survey'dst; enjoy'st, enjoy'dst_. All these forms, and such as these, are still commonly considered contractions, and therefore written with the apostrophe; but if the termination _st_ is sufficient of itself to mark the second person singular, as it certainly is considered to be as regards one half of them, and as it certainly was in the Saxon tongue still more generally, then for the other half there is no need of the apostrophe, because nothing is omitted. _Est_, like _es_, is generally a syllabic termination; but _st_, like _s_, is not. As signs of the third person, the _s_ and the _es_ are always considered equivalent; and, as signs of the second person, the _st_ and the _est_ are sometimes, and ought to be always, considered so too. To all verbs that admit the sound, we add the _s_ without marking it as a contraction for _es_; and there seems to be no reason at all against adding the _st_ in like manner, whenever we choose to form the second person without adding a syllable to the verb. The foregoing observations I commend to the particular attention of all those who hope to write such English as shall do them honour--to every one who, from a spark of literary ambition, may say of himself,

---------"I twine
My hopes of being remembered in my line
With my land's language."--_Byron's Childe Harold_, Canto iv, st. 9.

THE CONJUGATION OF VERBS.

The conjugation of a verb is a regular arrangement of its moods, tenses, persons, numbers, and participles.

There are four PRINCIPAL PARTS in the conjugation of every simple and complete verb; namely, the _Present_, the _Preterit_, the _Imperfect Participle_, and the _Perfect Participle_.[256] A verb which wants any of these parts, is called _defective_; such are most of the auxiliaries.

An _auxiliary_ is a short verb prefixed to one of the principal parts of an other verb, to express some particular mode and time of the being, action, or passion. The auxiliaries are _do, be, have, shall, will, may, can_, and _must_, with their variations.

OBSERVATIONS.

OBS. 1.--The _present_, or the verb in the present tense, is radically the same in all the moods, and is the part from which all the rest are formed. The present infinitive is commonly considered _the root_, or _simplest form_, of the English verb. We usually place the _preposition_ TO _before_ it; but never when with an auxiliary it forms a compound tense that is not infinitive: there are also some other exceptions, which plainly show, that the word _to_ is neither a part of the verb, as Cobbett, R. C. Smith, S. Kirkham, and Wells, say it is; nor a part of the infinitive mood, as Hart and many others will have it to be, but a distinct _preposition_. (See, in the _Syntax_ of this work, Observations on Rule 18th.) The preterit and the perfect participle are regularly formed by adding _d_ or _ed_, and the imperfect participle, by adding _ing_, to the present.

OBS. 2.--The moods and tenses, in English, are formed partly by inflections, or changes made in the verb itself, and partly by the combination of the verb or its participle, with a few short verbs, called _auxiliaries_, or _helping verbs_. This view of the subject, though disputed by some, is sustained by such a preponderance both of authority and of reason, that I shall not trouble the reader with any refutation of those who object to it. Murray the schoolmaster observes, "In the English language, the times and modes of verbs are expressed in a perfect, easy, and beautiful manner, by the aid of a few little words called _auxiliaries_, or _helping verbs_. The possibility of a thing is expressed by _can_ or _could_; the liberty to do a thing, by _may_ or _might_; the inclination of the will, by _will_ or _would_; the necessity of a thing, by _must_ or _ought, shall_ or _should_. The preposition _to_ is never expressed after the helping verbs, except after _ought_."--_Alex. Murray's Gram._, p. 112. See nearly the same words in _Buchanan's English Syntax_, p. 36; and in _the British Gram._, p. 125.

OBS. 3.--These authors are wrong in calling _ought_ a helping verb, and so is Oliver B. Peirce, in calling "_ought to_," and "_ought to have_" auxiliaries; for no auxiliary ever admits the preposition _to_ after it or into it: and Murray of Holdgate is no less in fault, for calling _let_ an auxiliary; because no mere auxiliary ever governs the objective case. The sentences, "He _ought_ to _help_ you," and, "_Let_ him _help_ you," severally involve two different moods: they are equivalent to, "It _is his duty_ to _help_ you;"--"_Permit_ him _to help_ you." Hence _ought_ and _let_ are not auxiliaries, but principal verbs.

OBS. 4.--Though most of the auxiliaries are defective, when compared with other verbs; yet these three, _do, be_, and _have_, being also principal verbs, are complete: but the participles of _do_ and _have_ are not used as auxiliaries; unless _having_, which helps to form the third or "compound perfect" participle, (as _having loved_,) may be considered such. The other auxiliaries have no participles.

OBS. 5.--English verbs are principally conjugated by means of auxiliaries; the only tenses which can be formed by the simple verb, being the present and the imperfect; as, I _love_, I _loved_. And even here an auxiliary is usually preferred in questions and negations; as, "_Do_ you love?"--"You _do_ not _love_." "_Did_ he _love_?"--"He _did_ not _love_." "_Do_ I not yet _grieve_?"--"_Did_ she not _die_?" All the other tenses, even in their simplest form, are compounds.

OBS. 6.--Dr. Johnson says, "_Do_ is sometimes used superfluously, as _I_ do _love, I_ did _love_; simply for _I love_, or _I loved_; but this is considered as a _vitious_ mode of speech."--_Gram., in 4to Dict._, p. 8. He also somewhere tells us, that these auxiliaries "are not proper before _be_ and _have_;" as, "_I do be_," for _I am_; "_I did have_," for _I had_. The latter remark is generally true, and it ought to be remembered;[257] but, in the _imperative mood, be_ and _have_ will perhaps admit the emphatic word _do_ before them, in a colloquial style: as, "Now _do be_ careful;"--"_Do have_ a little discretion." Sanborn repeatedly puts _do_ before _be_, in this mood: as, "_Do_ you _be. Do_ you _be_ guarded. _Do_ thou _be. Do_ thou _be_ guarded."--_Analytical Gram._, p. 150. "_Do_ thou _be_ watchful."--_Ib._, p. 155. In these instances, he must have forgotten that he had elsewhere said positively, that, "_Do_, as an auxiliary, _is never used_ with the verb _be_ or _am_."--_Ib._, p. 112. In the other moods, it is seldom, if ever, proper before _be_; but it is sometimes used before _have_, especially with a negative: as, "Those modes of charity which _do not have_ in view the cultivation of moral excellence, are essentially defective."--_Wayland's Moral Science_, p. 428. "Surely, the law of God, whether natural or revealed, _does not have_ respect merely to the external conduct of men."--_Stuart's Commentary on Romans_, p. 158. "And each day of our lives _do we have_ occasion to see and lament it."--_Dr. Bartlett's Lecture on Health_, p. 5. "Verbs, in themselves considered, _do not have_ person and number."--_R. C. Smith's New Gram._, p. 21. [This notion of Smith's is absurd. Kirkham taught the same as regards "person."] In the following example, _does he_ is used for _is_,--the auxiliary _is_,--and perhaps allowably: "It is certain from scripture, that the same person _does_ in the course of life many times offend and _be_ forgiven."--_West's Letters to a Young Lady_, p. 182.

OBS. 7.--In the compound tenses, there is never any variation of ending for the different persons and numbers, except in the _first auxiliary_: as, "Thou _wilt have finished_ it;" not, "Thou _wilt hast finishedst_ it;" for this is nonsense. And even for the former, it is better to say, in the familiar style, "Thou _will have finished_ it;" for it is characteristic of many of the auxiliaries, that, unlike other verbs, they are not varied by _s_ or _eth_, in the third person singular, and never by _st_ or _est_, in the second person singular, except in the solemn style. Thus all the auxiliaries of the potential mood, as well as _shall_ and _will_ of the indicative, are without inflection in the third person singular, though _will_, as a principal verb, makes _wills_ or _willeth_, as well as _willest_, in the indicative present. Hence there appears a tendency in the language, to confine the inflection of its verbs to _this tense only_; and to the auxiliary _have, hast, has_, which is essentially present, though used with a participle to form the perfect. _Do, dost, does_, and _am, art, is_, whether used as auxiliaries or as principal verbs, are always of the indicative present.

OBS. 8.--The word _need_,--(though, as a principal verb and transitive, it is unquestionably both regular and complete,--having all the requisite parts, _need, needed, needing, needed_,--and being necessarily inflected in the indicative present, as, I _need_, thou _needst_ or _needest_, he _needs_ or _needeth_,--) is so frequently used without inflection, when placed before an other verb to express a necessity of the being, action, or passion, that one may well question whether it has not become, under these circumstances, an _auxiliary_ of the potential mood; and therefore proper to be used, like all the other auxiliaries of this mood, without change of termination. I have not yet knowingly used it so myself, nor does it appear to have been classed with the auxiliaries, by any of our grammarians, except Webster.[258] I shall therefore not presume to say now, with positiveness, that it deserves this rank; (though I incline to think it does;) but rather quote such instances as have occurred to me in reading, and leave the student to take his choice, whether to condemn as bad English the uninflected examples, or to justify them in this manner. "He that can swim, _need_ not despair to fly."--_Johnson's Rasselas_, p. 29. "One therefore _needs_ not expect to do it."--_Kirkham's Elocution_, p. 155. "In so doing I should only record some vain opinions of this age, which a future one _need_ not know."--_Rush, on the Voice_, p. 345. "That a boy _needs_ not be kept at school."--LISDSEY: _in Kirkham's Elocution_, p. 164. "No man _need_ promise, unless he please."--_Wayland's Moral Science_, p. 312. "What better reason _needs_ be given?"--_Campbell's Rhet._, p. 51. "He _need_ assign no other reason for his conduct."--_Wayland, ib._, p. 214. "Sow there is nothing that a man _needs_ be ashamed of in all this."--_Collier's Antoninus_, p. 45. "No notice _need_ be taken of the advantages."--_Walker's Rhyming Dict._, Vol. ii, p. 304. "Yet it _needs_ not be repeated."--_Bicknell's Gram._, Part ii, p. 51. "He _need_ not be anxious."--_Greenleaf's Gram. Simplified_, p. 38. "He _needs_ not be afraid."--_Fisk's Gram. Simplified_, p. 124. "He who will not learn to spell, _needs_ not learn to write."--_Red Book_, p. 22. "The heeder _need_ be under no fear."--_Greenleaf's Gram._, p. 38.[259] "More _need_ not be said about it."--_Cobbett's E. Gram._, ¶ 272. "The object _needs_ not be expressed."--_Booth's Introduct. to Dict._, p. 37. "Indeed, there _need_ be no such thing."--_Fosdick's De Sacy_, p. 71. "This _needs_ to be illustrated."--_Ib._, p. 81. "And no part of the sentence _need_ be omitted."--_Parkhurst's Grammar for Beginners_, p. 114. "The learner _needs_ to know what sort of words are called verbs."--_Ib._, p. 6. "No one _need_ be apprehensive of suffering by faults of this kind."--_Sheridan's Elocution_, p. 171. "The student who has bought any of the former copies _needs_ not repent."--_Dr. Johnson, Adv. to Dict._ "He _need_ not enumerate their names."--_Edward's First Lessons in Grammar_, p. 38. "A quotation consisting of a word or two only _need_ not begin with a capital."--_Churchill's Gram._, p. 383. "Their sex is commonly known, and _needs_ not to be marked."--_Ib._, p. 72; _Murray's Octavo Gram._, 51. "One _need_ only open Lord Clarendon's history, to find examples every where."--_Blair's Rhet._, p. 108. "Their sex is commonly known, and _needs_ not be marked."--_Lowth's Gram._, p. 21; _Murray's Duodecimo Gram._, p. 51. "Nobody _need_ be afraid he shall not have scope enough."--LOCKE: _in Sanborn's Gram._, p. 168. "No part of the science of language, _needs to be ever_ uninteresting to the pursuer."--_Nutting's Gram._, p. vii. "The exact amount of knowledge is not, and _need_ not be, great."--_Todd's Student's Manual_, p. 44. "He _needs to_ act under a motive which is all-pervading."--_Ib._, p. 375. "What _need_ be said, will not occupy a long space."--_Ib._, p. 244. "The sign TO _needs_ not always be used."--_Bucke's Gram._, p. 96. "Such as he _need_ not be ashamed of."--_Snelling's Gift for Scribblers_, p. 23.

"_Needst_ thou--_need_ any one on earth--despair?"--_Ib._, p. 32.

"Take timely counsel; if your dire disease
Admits no cure, it _needs_ not to displease."--_Ib._, p. 14.