 Part 2 of A Grammar of the English Tongue, by Samuel Johnson, read for the LibriVox Language Learning Collection, Volume 1. Of nouns substantive. The relations of English nouns to words going before or following are not expressed by cases or changes of termination, but as in most of the other European languages by prepositions, unless we may be said to have a genitive case. Singular. Nominative. Magister. A master, the master. Genitive. Magistry. Of a master, of the master, or masters, the masters. Dative. Magistro. To a master, to the master. Accusative. Magistrum. A master, the master. Vocative. Magister. Master. O master. Ablative. Magistro. From a master, from the master. Plural. Nominative. Magistry. Masters. The masters. Genitive. Magistro. Of masters, of the masters. Dative. Magistras. To masters, to the masters. Accusative. Magistros. Masters. The masters. Vocative. Magistry. Masters. O masters. Ablative. Magistras. From masters, from the masters. Our nouns are therefore only declined thus. Master. Genitive. Masters. Plural. Masters. Scholar. Genitive. Scholars. Plural. Scholars. These genitives are always written with a mark of elision. M-A-S-T-E-R apostrophe S. S-C-H-O-L-A-R apostrophe S. According to an opinion long received that the apostrophe S is a contraction of his as the soldier's valor for the soldier his valor. But this cannot be the true original because apostrophe S is put to female nouns. Woman's beauty. The virgin's delicacy. Haughty Juno's unrelenting hate. And collective nouns as women's passions. The rabble's insolence. The multitude's folly. In all these cases it is apparent that his cannot be understood. We say likewise the foundation's strength, the diamond's luster, the winter's severity. But in these cases his may be understood, he and his having formerly been applied to neuters in the place now supplied by it and its. The learned and sagacious Wallace, to whom every English grammarian owes a tribute of reverence, calls this modification of the noun an adjective possessive. I think with no more propriety than he might have applied the same to the genitive in equitim desus, Trohey oris, or any other Latin genitive. Dr. Louth on the other part supposes the possessive pronouns mine and thine to be genitive cases. This termination of the noun seems to constitute a real genitive indicating possession. It is derived to us from the Saxons who declined smith a smith, genitive smither of a smith, plural smither or smidar, smiths. And so in two other of their seven declensions. It is a further confirmation of this opinion that in the Old Poets both the genitive and plural were longer by a syllable than the original word K-N-I-T-I-S for knights in Chaucer, L-E-A-V-I-S for leaves in Spencer. When a word ends in S, the genitive may be the same with the nominative as Venus Temple. The plural is formed by adding S as table, tables, fly, flies, sister, sisters, wood, woods, or E-S where S could not otherwise be sounded, as after C-H-S-S-H-X-Z. After C sounded like S and G like J. The mute E is vocal before S as lance, lances, outrage, outrages. The formation of the plural and genitive singular is the same. A few words still make the plural in N as men, women, oxen, swine, and more anciently, iron, shun. This formation is that which generally prevails in the Teutonic dialects. Words that end in F commonly form their plural by V-E-S as loaf, loaves, calf, calves. Except a few, muff, muffs, chief, chiefs, so hoof, roof, proof, relief, mischief, puff, cuff, dwarf, handkerchief, grief. Irregular plurals are teeth from tooth, lice from louse, mice from mouse, geese from goose, feet from foot, dice from die, pence from penny, brethren from brother, children from child. Plurals ending in S have no genitives, but we say women's excellencies, and weigh the men's wits against the lady's hairs. Dr. Willis thinks the Lord's house may be said for the house of Lords, but such phrases are not now in use, and surely an English ear rebels against them. They would commonly produce a troublesome ambiguity, as the Lord's house may be the house of Lords, or the house of a Lord. Besides that, the mark of elision is improper, for in the Lord's house nothing is cut off. Some English substantives, like those of many other languages, change their termination as they express different sexes. As prince, princess, actor, actress, lion, lioness, hero, heroine. To these mentioned by Dr. Louth may be added arbitrus, poetus, chantris, duchess, tigris, governess, tutris, purus, authorus, traitris, and perhaps others. Of these variable terminations we have only a sufficient number to make us feel our want. For when we say of a woman that she is a philosopher, an astronomer, a builder, a weaver, a dancer, we perceive an impropriety in the termination which we cannot avoid. But we can say that she is an architect, a botanist, a student, because these terminations have not annexed to them the notion of sex. In words which the necessities of life are often requiring, the sex is distinguished not by different terminations but by different names, as a bull, a cow, a horse, a mare, equus, equa, a cock, a hen, and sometimes by pronouns prefixed, as a he goat, a she goat. Of adjectives. Adjectives in the English language are wholly indeclinable, having neither case, gender nor number, and being added to substantives in all relations without any change, as a good woman, good women, of a good woman, a good man, good man, of good men. The comparison of adjectives. The comparative degree of adjectives is formed by adding E-R, the superlative by adding E-S-T to the positive, as fair, fairer, fairest, lovely, lovelier, loveliest, sweet, sweeter, sweetest, low, lower, lowest, high, higher, highest. Some words are irregularly compared, as good, better, best, bad, worse, worst, little, less, least, near, nearer, next, much more, most, many for MOE, more for MOE-R, most for MOE-ST, late, later, latest, or last. Some comparatives form a superlative by adding most, as nether, nether most, outer, outer most, under, under most, up, upper, uppermost, for, former, foremost. Most is sometimes added to a substantive, as topmost, southmost. Many adjectives do not admit of comparison by terminations, and are only compared by more and most, as benevolent, more benevolent, most benevolent. All adjectives may be compared by more and most, even when they have comparatives and superlatives regularly formed, as fair, fairer, or more fair, fairest, or most fair. In adjectives that admit a regular comparison, the comparative more is oftener used than the superlative most, as more fair is oftener written for fairer, than most fair for fairest. The comparison of adjectives is very uncertain, and being much regulated by commodiousness of utterance, or agreeableness of sound, is not easily reduced to rules. Monosyllables are commonly compared. Polysyllables, or words of more than two syllables, are seldom compared otherwise than by more and most, as deplorable, more deplorable, most deplorable. Dissyllables are seldom compared if they terminate in SOME, as fulsome, toilsome, in FUL, as careful, spleenful, dreadful, in ING, as trifling, charming, in OUS, as porous, in LESS, as careless, harmless, in ED, as wretched, in ID, as candid, in AL, as mortal, in ENT, as recent, fervent, in AIN, as certain, in IVE, as missive, in DY, as woody, in FY, as puffy, in KY, as rocky, except lucky, in MY, as roomy, in NY, as skinny, in PY, as ropey, except happy, in RY, as hoary. Some comparatives and superlatives are yet found in good writers formed without regard to the foregoing rules. But in a language subjected so little and so lately to grammar, such anomalies must frequently occur. So Shady is compared by Milton. She, in Shady's covert hid, tuned her nocturnal note. Paradise Lost And Virtuous What she wills to say or do seems wisest, virtuosist, discreetest, best. Paradise Lost So trifling by Ray, who is indeed of no great authority. It is not so decorous, in respect of God, that he should immediately do all the meanest and triflingest things himself, without making use of any inferior or subordinate minister. Ray on the Creation Famous by Milton I shall be named among the famousst of women, sung at solemn festivals, Milton's agonisties. Inventive by Asham Those have the inventivist heads for all purposes and roundest tongues in all matters. Asham's Schoolmaster Mortal by Bacon The mortalist poisons practiced by the West Indians have some mixture of the blood, fat, or flesh of man. Bacon Natural by Watton I will now deliver a few of the properst and naturalist considerations that belong to this piece. Watton's Architecture Wretched by Johnson The Wretched are the Contaminers of all helps, such as presuming on their own naturals, deride diligence, and mock at terms when they understand not things. Ben Johnson Powerful by Milton We have sustained one day in doubtful fight. What Heaven's great King hath powerfulest to send against us from about his throne. Paradise Lost The termination in I.S.H. may be accounted in some sort a degree of comparison, by which the signification is diminished below the positive, as black, blackish, or tending to blackness, salt, saltish, or having a little taste of salt. They therefore admit no comparison. This termination is seldom added but to words expressing sensible qualities, nor often to words of above one syllable, and is scarcely used in the solemn or sublime style. Of Pronouns Pronouns in the English language are I, Thou, He, with their plurals We, Ye, They, It, Who, Which, What, Whether, Whosoever, Whatsoever, My, Mine, Our, Ours, Thy, Thine, Your, Yours, His, Her, Hers, Theirs, This, That, Other, And Other, The Same, Some. The pronouns personal are irregularly inflected. Singular Nominative, I, Plural Nominative, We, Accusative, And Me, Us, Other Oblique Cases Nominative, Thou, Ye, Oblique, Thee, You You is commonly used in modern writers for Ye, particularly in the language of Ceremony, where the second person plural is used for the second person singular. You are my friend. Singular Nominative, He, Plural Nominative, They, Applied to Masculines Oblique, Him, Them Nominative, She, They, Applied to Feminines Oblique, Her, Them Nominative, It, They, Applied to Nuders or Things Oblique, It's, Them For It, the practice of ancient writers was to use He, and for It's, His. The possessive pronouns, like other adjectives, are without cases or change of termination. The possessive of the first person is my, mine, our, ours, of the second, thy, thine, your, yours, of the third, from He, His, from She, Her, and Hers, and in the plural, their, theirs, for both sexes. Ours, yours, hers, theirs are used when the substantive preceding is separated by a verb, as these are our books, these books are ours. Your children excel ours in stature, but ours surpass yours in learning. Ours, yours, hers, theirs, notwithstanding their seeming plural termination, are applied equally to singular and plural substantives, as this book is ours, these books are ours. Mine and thine were formerly used before avowal, as mine amiable lady, which though now disused in prose, might be still properly continued in poetry. They are used as ours and yours when they are referred to a substantive preceding, as thy house is larger than mine, but my garden is more spacious than thine. There and theirs are the possessives likewise of they, when they is the plural of It, and are therefore applied to things. Pronouns relative are who, which, what, whether, whosoever, whatsoever. Nominative, who, genitive, whose, other oblique cases, whom. Nominative, which, genitive, of which, or whose, other oblique cases, which, who is now used in relation to persons, and which in relation to things, but they were anciently confounded, at least it was common to say the man which, though I remember no example of the thing who. Who's is rather the poetical than regular genitive of which? The fruit of that forbidden tree, whose mortal taste brought death into the world. Milton. Weather is only used in the nominative and accusative cases, and has no plural, being applied only to one of a number, commonly to one of two, as whether of these is left I know not. Whether shall I choose? It is now almost obsolete. What, whether relative or interrogative, is without variation? Whosoever, whatsoever, being compounded of who or what, and so ever, follow the rule of their primitives. Singular. This. Plural. These. In all cases, that those. Other. Others. Weather. The plural others is not used, but when it is referred to a substantive preceding, as I have sent other horses. I have not sent the same horses, but others. Another, being only an other, has no plural. Here, there, and where, joined with certain particles, have a relative and phenomenal use. Hereof, herein, hereby, hereafter, herewith, thereof, therein, thereby, thereupon, therewith, whereof, wherein, whereby, whereupon, wherewith, which signify of this, in this, et cetera, of that, in that, et cetera, of which, in which, et cetera. Therefor and wherefore, which are properly T-H-E-R-E-F-O-R, and W-H-E-R-E-F-O-R, for that, for which, are now reckoned conjunctions and continued in use. The rest seem to be passing by degrees into neglect, though proper, useful, and analogous. They are referred both to singular and plural antecedents. There are two more words used only in conjunction with pronouns, own and self. Own is added to possessives both singular and plural, as my own hand, our own house. It is emphatical, and implies a silent contrariety, or opposition, as I live in my own house that is not in a hired house. This I did with my own hand, that is, without help or not by proxy. Self is added to possessives, as myself, yourselves, and sometimes to personal pronouns, as himself, itself, themselves. It, then, like own expresses emphasis and opposition, as I did this myself, that is, not another. Or it forms a reciprocal pronoun, as we hurt ourselves by vain rage. Himself, itself, themselves, are supposed by Wallace to be put by corruption, for his self, itself, their selves, so that self is always a substantive. This seems justly observed, for we say he came himself. Himself shall do this, where himself cannot be an accusative. Of the verb English verbs are active, as I love, or neuter, as I languish. The neuters are formed like the actives. Most verbs signifying action may likewise signify condition or habit, and become neuters, as I love, I am in love, I strike, I am now striking. Verbs have only two tenses inflected in their terminations, the present and simple preterite. The other tenses are compounded of the auxiliary verbs have, shall, will, let, may, can, and the infinitive of the active or neuter verb. The passive voice is formed by joining the participle preterite to the substantive verb, as I am loved. To have, indicative mood, present tense, singular, I have, thou hast, he hath, or has, plural, we have, ye have, they have. Has is a termination connoted from half, but now more frequently used both in verse and prose. Simple preterite, singular, I had, thou hast, he had, plural, we had, ye had, they had. Compound preterite, singular, I have had, thou hast had, he has, or hath had. Plural, we have had, ye have had, they have had. Preter plup perfect, singular, I had had, thou hast had, he had had. Plural, we had had, ye had had, they had had. Future, singular, I shall have, thou shalt have, he shall have. Plural, we shall have, we shall have, ye shall have, they shall have. Second future, singular, I will have, thou wilt have, he will have. Plural, we will have, ye wilt have, they will have. By reading these future tenses may be observed the variations of shall and will. Imperative mood, singular, have, or have thou, let him have. Plural, let us have, have, or have ye, let them have. Conjunctive mood, present. Singular, I have, thou have, he have. Plural, we have, ye have, they have. Preter it simple as in the indicative. Preter it compound. Singular, I have had, thou have had, he have had. Plural, we have had, ye have had, they have had. Future, singular, I shall have as in the indicative. Second future, singular, I shall have had, thou shalt have had, he shall have had. Plural, we shall have had, ye shall have had, they shall have had. Potential, the potential form of speaking is expressed by may, can, in the present, and might, could, or should, in the preter it, joined with the infinitive mood of the verb. Present, singular, I may have, thou mayst have, he may have. Plural, we may have, ye may have, they may have. Preter it singular, I might have, thou mightst have, he might have. Plural, we might have, ye might have, they might have. Present, singular, I can have, thou canst have, he can have. Plural, we can have, ye can have, they can have. Preter it singular, I could have, thou couldst have, he could have. Plural, we could have, ye could have, they could have. In like manner should is united to the verb. There is likewise a double preter it. Singular, I should have had, thou shouldst have had, he should have had. Plural, we should have had, ye should have had, they should have had. In like manner we use I might have had, I could have had, etc. Infinitive mood. Present, to have, preter it, to have had. Participle present, having, participle preter it, had. Verb active, to love. Indicative, present, singular, I love, thou lovest, he loveth, or loves. Plural, we love, ye love, they love. Preter it simple. Singular, I loved, thou loveth, he loved. Plural, we loved, ye loved, they loved. Preter perfect, compound, I have loved, etc. Preter pluperfect, I had loved, etc. Future, I shall love, etc. I will love, etc. Imperative Singular, love or love, thou let him love. Plural, let us love, love or love, ye, let them love. Conjunctive, present, singular, I love, thou love, he love. Plural, we love, ye love, they love. Preter it simple, as in the indicative. Preter it compound, I have loved, etc. Future, I shall love, etc. Second future, I shall have loved, etc. Potential, present, I may or can love, etc. Preter it, I might, could or should love, etc. Double preter it, I might, could or should have loved, etc. Infinitive, present, to love. Preter it, to have loved. Participal present, loving. Participal past, loved. The passive is formed by the addition of the participal preter it to the different tenses of the verb to be, which must therefore be here exhibited. Indicative, present, singular, I am, thou art, he is. Plural, we are or be, ye are or be, they are or be. The plural B is now little in use. Preter it, singular, I was, thou wasst or wort, he was. Plural, we were, ye were, they were. Wurt is properly of the conjunctive mood and ought not to be used in the indicative. Preter it compound, I have been, etc. Preter plup perfect, I had been, etc. Future, I shall or will be, etc. Imperative, singular, be thou, let him be, plural, let us be, be ye, let them be. Conjunctive, present, singular, I be, thou beest, he be. Plural, we be, ye be, they be. Preter it, singular, I were, thou wort, he were. Plural, we were, ye were, they were. Preter it compound, I have been, etc. Future, I shall have been, etc. Potential, I may or can, would, could or should be, could, would or should have been, etc. Infinitive, present, to be, preter it, to have been, participle present, being, participle preter it, having been. Passive voice, indicative mood. I am loved, etc. I was loved, etc. I have been loved, etc. Conjunctive mood. If I be loved, etc. If I were loved, etc. If I shall have been loved, etc. Potential mood. I may or can be loved, etc. I might could or should be loved, etc. I might could or should have been loved, etc. Infinitive, present, to be loved, preter it, to have been loved, participle, loved. There is another form of English verbs in which the infinitive mood is joined to the verb do in its various inflections, which are therefore to be learned in this place. To do. Indicative. Present. Singular, I do, thou dost he doth. Plural, we do, ye do, they do. Preter it. Singular, I did, thou didst, he did. Plural, we did, ye did, they did. Preter it, etc. I have done, etc. I had done, etc. Future, I shall or will do, etc. Imperative. Singular, do thou, let him do. Plural, let us do, do ye, let them do. Conjunctive. Present. Singular. I do, thou do, he do. Plural, we do, ye do, they do. The rest are as in the indicative. Infinite. To do, to have done, participle, present, doing, participle, preter it, done. 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 vicious mode of speech. It is sometimes used emphatically, as I do love thee, and when I love thee not chaos has come again. Shakespeare. It is frequently joined with a negative as I like her, but I do not love her. I wished him success, but did not help him. This, by custom at least, appears more easy than the other form of expressing the same sense by a negative adverb after the verb, I like her, but love her not. The imperative prohibitory is seldom applied in the second person, at least in prose, without the word do, as stop him, but do not hurt him. Praise beauty, but do not dot on it. Its chief use is in interrogative forms of speech, in which it is used through all the persons, as do I live, dost thou strike me, do they rebel, did I complain, dist thou love her, did she die, so likewise in negative interrogations. Do I not yet grieve, did she not die? Do and did are thus used only for the present and simple preterite. There is another matter of conjugating neuter verbs, which, when it is used, may not improperly denominate them neuter passives, as they are inflected according to the passive form by the help of the verb substantive, to be. They answer nearly to the reciprocal verbs in French, as I am risen. In like manner, we commonly express the present tense, as I am going, eh oh. I am grieving, do le oh. She is dying, illa moriter. The tempest is raging, ferret procella. I am pursuing an enemy, hastem in sequor. So the other tenses, as we were walking, Greek and T'inchannamon parapetuntis. I have been walking, I had been walking, I shall or will be walking. There is another manner of using the active participle, which gives it a passive signification, as the grammar is now printing. Grammatica jamnunk chartis imprimatur. The brass is forging, ara excudunter. This is, in my opinion, a vicious expression, probably corrupted from a phrase more pure, but now somewhat obsolete. The book is a printing. The brass is a forging. Ah being properly at, and printing and forging verbal nouns signifying action, according to the analogy of this language. The indicative and conjunctive moods are by modern writers frequently confounded, or rather the conjunctive is wholly neglected, when some convenience of versification does not invite its revival. It is used among the purer writers of former times after if, though, ere, before, till, or until, whether, except, unless, whatsoever, whomsoever, and words of wishing, as doubtless thou art our Father, though Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel acknowledge us not. Of Irregular Verbs The English verbs were divided by Ben Johnson into four conjugations, without any reason arising from the nature of the language, which is properly but one conjugation, such as has been exemplified. From which all deviations are to be considered as anomalies, which are indeed in our monosyllable Saxon verbs, and the verbs derived from them very frequent, but almost all the verbs which have been adopted from other languages follow the regular form. Our verbs are observed by Dr. Wallace to be irregular only in the formation of the preterite, and its participle. Indeed, in the scantiness of our conjugations, there is scarcely any other place for irregularity. The first irregularity is a slight deviation from the regular form, by rapid utterance or poetical contraction. The last syllable, E-D, is often joined with the former by suppression of E, as L-O-V-D for loved. After C, C-H, S-H, F, K, X, and after the consonants S, T-H, when more strongly pronounced, and sometimes after M, N, R, if preceded by a short vowel. T is used in pronunciation, but very seldom in writing, rather than D. As P-L-A-C-A-T, S-N-A-T-C-H-T, F-I-S-H-T, W-A-K-T, D-W-E-L-T, S-M-E-L-A-T for P-L-A-C-A-D, S-N-A-T-C-H-A-D, F-I-S-H-A-D, W-A-K-A-D, D-W-E-L-A-D, S-M-E-L-A-D, or P-L-A-C-E-D, S-N-A-T-C-H-E-D, F-I-S-H-E-D, W-A-K-E-D, D-W-E-L-L-E-D, S-M-E-L-L-E-D. Those words which terminate in L or L-L or P make their preterite in T, even in solemn language, as crept, felt, dwelt. Sometimes after X, E-D is changed into T, as vexed. This is not constant. A long vowel is often changed into a short one, thus kept, slept, wept, crept, swept, from the verbs to keep, to sleep, to weep, to creep, to sweep. Where D or T go before, the additional letter D or T, in this contracted form, coalesce into one letter with the radical D or T. If T were the radical, they coalesce into T, but if D were the radical, then into D or T, as the one or the other letter may be more easily pronounced. As red, lead, spread, shed, shred, bid, hid, chid, fed, bled, bred, sped, strid, slid, rid. From the verbs to read, to lead, to spread, to shed, to shred, to bid, to hide, to chide, to feed, to bleed, to breed, to speed, to stride, to slide, to ride. And thus cast, hurt, cost, burst, eat, beat, sweat, sit, quit, smit, rit, bit, hit, met, shot. From the verbs to cast, to hurt, to cost, to burst, to eat, to beat, to sweat, to sit, to quit, to smite, to write, to bite, to hit, to meet, to shoot. And in like manner, lent, sent, rent, girt. From the verbs to lend, to send, to rend, to gird. The participle, preterite, or passive is often formed in E-N instead of E-D, as ben, taken, given, slain, known. From the verbs to be, to take, to give, to slay, to know. Many words have two or more participles, as not only written, bitten, eaten, beaten, hidden, chidden, shatten, chosen, broken. But likewise, rit, bit, eat, beat, hid, chid, shot, chose, broke, are promiscuously used in the participle. From the verbs to write, to bite, to eat, to beat, to hide, to chide, to shoot, to choose, to break, and many such like. In the same manner, sewn, shewn, hewn, moan, loaden, laden, as well as sowed, showed, hewed, mowed, loaded, laded. From the verbs to sow, to show, to hew, to mow, to load, to lad. Concerning these double participles, it is difficult to give any rule. But he shall seldom err, who remembers, that when a verb has a participle distinct from its preterite, as right wrote written, that distinct participle is more proper and elegant, as the book is written, is better than the book is wrote. Wrote, however, may be used in poetry, at least if we allow any authority to poets, who in the exaltation of genius think themselves perhaps entitled to trample on grammarians. There are other anomalies in the preterite. 1. When, spin, begin, swim, strike, stick, sing, sting, fling, ring, ring, spring, swing, drink, sink, shrink, stink, come, run, find, bind, grind, wind, both in the preterite, imperfect and participle passive. Give one, spun, begun, swum, struck, stuck, sung, stung, flung, rung, rung, sprung, swung, drunk, sunk, shrunk, stunk, come, run, found, bound, ground, wound. And most of them are also formed in the preterite by a, as began, sang, rang, sprang, drank, came, ran, and some others. But most of these are now obsolete. Some in the participle passive likewise take E N as stricken, strucken, drunken, bounden. 2. Fight, teach, reach, seek, beseech, catch, buy, bring, think, work, make, thought, taught, wrought, sought, besought, caught, bought, brought, thought, wrought. But a great many of these retain likewise the regular form as teached, reached, beseeched, catched, worked. 3. Take, shake, forsake, wake, awake, stand, break, speak, bear, sheer, swear, tear, wear, weave, cleave, strive, thrive, drive, shine, rise, arise, smite, right, bide, abide, ride, choose, choose, tread, get, beget, forget, sieve. Make in both preterite and participle, took, shook, forsook, woke, awoke, stood, broke, spoke, bore, shore, swore, tore, wore, wove, clove, strove, throve, drove, shone, rose, arose, smote, wrote, bode, abode, rode, chose, trod, got, begot, forgot, sod. But we say likewise thrive, rise, smite, writ, abide, rid. In the preterite some are likewise formed by a as break, spake, bear, share, swear, tear, wear, clave, get, begot, forget, and perhaps some others, but more rarely. In the participle passive many of them are formed by en as taken, shaken, shaken, forsaken, broken, spoken, born, shorn, sworn, torn, worn, woven, cloven, thriving, driven, risen, smitten, ridden, chosen, trodden, gotten, begotten, forgotten, sodden. And many do likewise retain the analogy in both as waked, awaked, sheared, weaved, cleaved, abided, sieved. Four. Give, bid, sit, make in the preterite gave, bade, sate. In the participle passive given, bidden, sitten. But in both bid. Five. Draw, know, grow, throw, blow, crow, like a cock, fly, slay, see, lie. Make their preterite drew, knew, grew, threw, blew, crew, flew, slew, saw, lay. Their participle passive by en, drawn, known, grown, thrown, blown, flown, slain, seen, lean, lain. Yet from flea is made fled, from go, went, from the old wend. The participle is gone. End of part two of A Grammar of the English Language by Samuel Johnson. Read by Bill Borscht. Part three of A Grammar of the English Tongue by Samuel Johnson. Read for the LibriVox Language Learning Collection, volume one. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Of Derivation That the English language may be more easily understood. It is necessary to inquire how its derivative words are deduced from their primitives, and how the primitives are borrowed from other languages. In this inquiry, I shall sometimes copy Dr. Wallace and sometimes endeavour to supply his detects and rectify his errors. Nouns are derived from verbs. The thing implied in the verb, as done or produced, is commonly either the present of the verb. As to love, love, to fright, of fright, to fight, of fight, or the preterite of the verb, as to strike, I strict, or struck, a stroke. The action is the same with the participle present, as loving, frighting, fighting, striking. The agent or person acting is denoted by the syllable er added to the verb, as lover, friter, striker. Substantives, adjectives, and sometimes other parts of speech are changed into verbs, in which case the vowel is often lengthened, or the consonant softened, as a house, to house, brass, to braise, glass, to glaze, grass, to graze, price, to prize, breath, to breathe, a fish, to fish, oil, to oil, further, to further, forward, to forward, hinder, to hinder. Sometimes the termination en is added, especially to adjectives, as haste, to hasten, length, to lengthen, strength, to strengthen, short, to shorten, fast, to fasten, white, to whiten, black, to blacken, hard, to harden, soft, to soften. From substantives are formed adjectives of plenty, by adding the termination why, as a louse, lousy, wealth, wealthy, health, healthy, might, mighty, worth, worthy, wit, witty, lust, lusty, water, watery, earth, earthy, wood, a wood, woody, air, airy, a heart, hearty, a hand, handy. From substantives are formed adjectives of plenty, by adding the termination ful, denoting abundance, as joy, joyful, fruit, fruitful, youth, youthful, care, careful, use, useful, delight, delightful, plenty, plentiful, help, helpful. Sometimes in almost the same sense, but with some kind of diminution thereof, the termination s-o-m-e is added, denoting something, or in some degree, as delight, delightsome, game, gamesome, irk, irksome, burden, burdensome, trouble, troublesome, light, lightsome, hand, handsome, alone, lonesome, toil, toilsome. On the contrary, the termination l-e-s-s, added to substantives, makes adjectives signifying want, as worthless, witless, heartless, joyless, careless, helpless, thus comfort, comfortless, sap, sapless. Privation, or contrariety, is very often denoted by the participle u-n, prefixed to many adjectives, or i-n, before words derived from the Latin, as pleasant, unpleasant, wise, unwise, profitable, unprofitable, patient, impatient, thus unworthy, unhealthy, unfruitful, unuseful, and many more. The original English privative is u-n, but as we often borrow from the Latin, or its descendants, words already signifying privation, as inefficacious, impious, indiscreet, the inseparable particles u-n and i-n have fallen into confusion, from which it is not easy to disentangle them. u-n is prefixed to all words originally English, as untrue, untruth, untaught, unhandsome. u-n is prefixed to all participle's made privative adjectives, as unfeeling, unassisting, unaided, undelighted, unendeered. u-n ought never to be prefixed to a participle present to mark a forbearance of action, as unsying, but a privation of habit, as unpitying. u-n is prefixed to most substantives, which have an English termination, as unfertleness, unperfectness, which if they have borrowed terminations, take i-n or i-m as infertility, imperfection, uncivil, incivility, unactive, inactivity. In borrowing adjectives, if we receive them already compounded, it is usual to retain the particle prefixed, as indecent, inelegant, improper, but if we borrow the adjective and add the privative particle, we commonly prefix u-n as unpalite, un-gallant. The prepositive particles, d-i-s and m-i-s, derived from the d-e-s and m-e-s of the French, signify almost the same as u-n. Yet, d-i-s rather imports contrariety than privation, since it answers to the Latin preposition de. M-i-s insinuates some error, and for the most part may be rendered by the Latin words mal-e or perperon. To like, to dislike, honor, dishonor, to honor, to grace, to dishonor, to disgrace, to dain, to disdain, chance, hap, misschance, mishap, to take, to mistake, deed, misdeed, to use, to misuse, to employ, to mis-employ, to apply, to misapply. Words derived from Latin written with d-e or d-i-s retain the same signification as distinguish, distinguo, detract, detrajo, defame, defamo, detain, detenao. The termination ly added to substantives and sometimes to adjectives forms adjectives that import some kind of similitude or agreement, being formed by contraction of l-i-c-k or l-i-k-e. A giant giantly, giantlike, earth, earthly, heaven, heavenly, world, worldly, god, godly, good, goodly. The same termination ly added to adjectives forms adverbs of like signification as beautiful beautifully, sweet, sweetly, that is, in a beautiful manner with some degree of sweetness. The termination ish added to adjectives imports diminution, and added to substantives import similitude or tendency to a character as green, greenish, white, whitish, soft, softish, a thief, thievish, a wolf, wolfish, a child, childish. We have forms of diminutives in substantives, though not frequent, as a hill, a hillock, a cock, a cockerel, a pike, a pickerel. This is a French termination, a goose, a gasoline, this is a German termination, a lamb, a lambkin, a chick, a chicken, a man, a mannequin, a pipe, a pipkin, and thus hulkin, once the patriotic hawkins, wilkin, tomkin, and others. Yet still there is another form of diminution among the English by lessening the sound itself, especially of vowels, as there is a form of augmenting them by enlarging or even lengthening it, and that sometimes not so much by change of the letters as of their pronunciation. As sup, sip, soup, sop, sipit, where besides the extenuation of the vowel, there is added the French termination et, top, tip, spit, spout, babe, baby, booby, Greek, bupis, great pronounced long, especially if with a stronger sound, great, little pronounced long, lethal, ting, tang, tong, imports a succession of smaller and then greater sounds, and so in jingle, jangle, tingle, tangle, and many other made words. Much, however, of this is arbitrary and fanciful, depending wholly on oral utterance, and therefore scarcely worthy the notice of Wallace. Of concrete adjectives are made abstract substantives. By adding the termination n-e-s-s, and a few in h-o-o-d, or h-e-a-d, noting character or qualities, as white, whiteness, hard, hardness, great, greatness, skillful, skillfulness, unskillfulness, godhead, manhood, maidenhead, widowhood, knighthood, priesthood, likelihood, falsehood. There are other abstracts, partly derived from adjectives, and partly from verbs, which are formed by the addition of the termination th, a small change being sometimes made, as long length, strong strength, broad breadth, wide width, deep depth, true truth, warm warmth, dear dearth, slow sloth, merry mirth, heel health, well wheel wealth, dry drought, young youth, and so moon month. Like these are some words derived from verbs, die death, till tilth, grow th, mow, later moth, after moth. Commonly spoken and written later, math after math, steel, stealth, bear, birth, rue, ruth, and probably earth, from to ear or plow, fly, flight, way, wait, fray, fright, draw, draft. These should rather be written, flight, frithe, only that custom will not suffer age to be twice repeated. The same form retain faith, spite, wreath, wrath, broth, froth, breath, sooth, worth, light, white, and the like, whose primitives are either entirely obsolete or seldom occur. Perhaps they are derived from fe, or foi, spry, rye, reek, brew, mow, fry, bray, say, work. Some ending in ship imply an office, employment, or condition, as kingship, wardship, guardianship, partnership, stewardship, headship, lordship, thus worship, that is, worth, ship, whence worshipful and to worship. Some few ending in D-O-M-R-I-C-K-W-I-C-K do especially denote dominion, at least state or condition, as kingdom, dukdom, earldom, prinstom, popdom, christendom, freedom, wisdom, hordom, bishopprick, bellowick. M-E-N-T and A-G-E are plainly French terminations and are of the same import with us as among them, scarcely ever occurring except in words derived from the French as commandment, usage. There are in English often long trains of words allied by their meaning and derivation as to beat, a bat, betoon, a battle, a beetle, a battle door, to batter, batter, a kind of glutinous composition for food made by beating different bodies into one mass. All these are of similar signification and perhaps derived from the Latin battuo. Thus take, touch, tickle, tack, tackle, all imply a local conjunction from the Latin tango, te-te-gi, tectum. From two are formed twain, twice, twenty, twelve, twins, twine, twist, twirl, twig, twitch, twinge, between, betwixt, twilight, twible. The following remarks extracted from Wallace are ingenious but of more subtlety than solidity, and such as perhaps might in every language be enlarged without end. SN usually imply the nose and what relates to it. From the Latin, nasus, are derived the French ne and the English nose, and nes, a promontory as projecting like a nose. But as if from the consonants ns taken from nasus and transposed that they may the better correspond, sn denote nasus, and thence are derived many words that relate to the nose as snout, sneeze, snore, snort, sneer, snicker, snot, snivel, snite, snuff, snuffle, snaffle, snarl, snudge. There is another sn which may perhaps be derived from the Latin senuo, as snake, sneak, snail, snare, so likewise snap and snatch, snib, snub. BL imply a blast, as blow, blast, to blast, to blight, and metaphorically to blast one's reputation. Bleat, bleak, a bleak place, to look bleak, or weather-beaten. Black, blay, bleach, bluster, blurt, blister, blab, bladder, blue, blabber, lipped, blubber cheeked, bloated, bloat herrings, blast, blaze, to blow that is blossom, bloom, and perhaps blood and blush. In the native words of our tongue is to be found a great agreement between the letters and the things signified, and therefore the sounds of the letters smaller, sharper, louder, closer, softer, stronger, clearer, more obscure, and more stridulous do very often intimate the like effects and things signified. Thus words that begin with STR intimate the force and effect of the things signified as if probably derived from Greek stronymy, or strenuous, as strong, strength, strew, strike, streak, stroke, stripe, strive, strife, struggle, strout, strut, stretch, straight, strict, straight, that is narrow, distrain, stress, distress, string, strap, stream, streamer, strand, strip, stray, struggle, strange, stride, straddle. ST in like manner imply strength, but in a less degree, so much only as is sufficient to preserve what has been already communicated, rather than acquire any new degree, as if it were derived from the Latin STO. For example, stand, stay, that is to remain, or to prop, staff, stay, that is to oppose, stop, to stuff, stifle, to stay, that is to stop, a stay, that is an obstacle, stick, stut, stutter, stammer, stagger, stickle, stick, stake, a sharp pale, and anything deposited at play, stock, stem, sting, to sting, stink, stitch, stud, stunction, stub, stubble, to stub up, stump, wence, stumble, stalk, to stalk, step, to stamp, with the feet, wence to stamp, that is to make an impression and a stamp, stow, to stow, to be stow, steward, or stoward, stead, steady, steadfast, stable, a stable, a stall, to stall, stool, stall, still, stall, stallage, stage, still, adjective, and still, adverb, stale, stout, sturdy, stead, stote, stallion, stiff, stark dead, to starve with hunger or cold, stone, steel, stern, stanch, to stanch blood, to stare, steep, steeple, stare, standard, a stated measure, stately, in all these, and perhaps some others, ST denotes something firm and fixed. THR imply a more violent degree of motion as throw, thrust, throng, throb, through, threat, threaten, thrall, throes. WR imply some sort of obliquity or distortion as rye, to wreath, to rest, wrestle, ring, wrong, wrench, wrench, wrangle, wrinkle, wrath, reek, rack, wretch, wrist, wrap. SW imply a silent agitation or a softer kind of lateral motion as sway, swag, to sway, swagger, swerve, sweat, sweep, swill, swim, swing, swift, sweet, switch, swinge. Nor is there much difference of sm in smooth, smug, smile, smirk, smite, which signifies the same as to strike, but is a softer word. SMALL, SMELL, SMACK, SMOTHER, SMART. A smart blow properly signifies such a kind of stroke as with an originally silent motion, implied in SM. Proceeds to a quick violence, denoted by AR, suddenly ended, as is shown by T. CL denote a kind of adhesion or tenacity as in cleave, clay, cling, climb, clamor, clammy, clasp, to clasp, to clip, to clinch, cloak, clog, close, to close, a clod, a clot, as a clot of blood, clouted cream, a clutter, a cluster. SP imply a kind of dissipation or expansion, especially a quick one. Particularly if there be an R, as if it were from Spargo or Separo. For example, spread, spring, sprig, sprout, sprinkle, split, splinter, spill, spit, sputter, spatter. SL denote a kind of silent fall or a less observable motion as in slime, slide, slip, slipper, sly, slate, slit, slow, slack, slight, sling, slap. And so likewise ASH in crash, rash, gash, flash, clash, lash, slash, plash, trash indicate something acting more nimbly and sharply. But USH in crush, rush, gush, flush, blush, brush, hush, push imply something as acting more obtusely and dully. Yet in both there is indicated a swift and sudden motion not instantaneous, but gradual, by the continued sound SH. Thus in fling, sling, ding, swing, cling, sing, ring, sting. The tingling of the termination NG and the sharpness of the vowel I imply the continuation of a very slender motion or tremor at length indeed vanishing, but not suddenly interrupted. But in tink, wink, sink, clink, chink, think, that end in a mute consonant there was also indicated a sudden ending. End of part 3 of A Grammar of the English Tongue by Samuel Johnson, read by Bill Borst.