¹ For a brief history of the English language, see p.316.?

² Compare pp.316–317.?

³ In this book, well-established colloquial idioms or constructions are mentioned from time to time, but always with a note as to their actual status in the language.?

⁴ In this book, several old forms and constructions which the student is constantly encountering in the English classics are treated in their proper places,—always with an indication of their difference from the modern standard.?

⁵ In the technical language of grammar an adjective is said to describe a substantive when it describes the object which the substantive denotes.?

⁶ Definitive adjectives are often called limiting adjectives. All adjectives, however, limit, even those that also describe.?

⁷ The usual brief definition of a verb is, “A verb is a word which asserts.” But this definition in strictness applies only to verbs in declarative sentences.?

⁸ For full inflection see pp.300–301.?

⁹ Compound complex sentences are also called complex compound sentences. For further treatment of such sentences, see pp.187, 190, 215–216.?

¹⁰ Vixen is really formed from fox (compare the German FÜchsin from Fuchs).?

¹¹ Halo, memento, zero also form a plural in es (haloes, etc.).?

¹² This list is intended for reference.?

¹³ The English word animalcule (plural animalcules) is preferable. The plural animalculÆ is erroneous.?

¹⁴ Messrs. is an abbreviation of the French messieurs.?

¹⁵ When such nouns as chemistry refer to textbooks, they may be used in the plural: as,—“Bring your chemistries to-morrow.”?

¹⁶ This section is intended chiefly for reference.?

¹⁷ Note the ambiguity to the ear though not to the eye.?

¹⁸ The only exception is in reflexive action, where the object is a compound personal pronoun (“Charles deceived himself”). See §126.?

¹⁹ The pupil should not “supply nouns” in such sentences as these. For example, it is unscientific to expand the first sentence into “This [morning] is a fine morning,” and then to parse this as an adjective. It is even more objectionable to expand the fifth sentence by inserting thing or the like after this. The plan of “supplying” unexpressed words (as being “understood”) tends to confuse real distinctions of language, and should never be resorted to when it can be avoided.?

²⁰ The negative not (§190, 4) is merely a shortened form of naught.?

²¹ Because of their use as connectives, relative pronouns are sometimes called conjunctive pronouns.?

²² For indirect questions, see §441.?

²³ In some of these cases the comparative and superlative are really different words from the positive.?

²⁴ The four classes are not absolute, for the same adverb may be used in different senses and thus belong to different classes. Sometimes, too, there is room for difference of opinion. Thus in the fourth and fifth examples under 1, terribly and surprisingly are equivalent to “in a terrible (or surprising) manner,” and therefore are classified as adverbs of manner; but they may also be regarded as adverbs of degree.?

²⁵ Many comparatives and superlatives in er and est that are no longer allowable in prose are still used in poetry.?

²⁶ Many grammarians regard is and the noun or adjective that follows it (is money, etc.) as the simple predicate; but the nomenclature here adopted is equally scientific and more convenient.?

²⁷ The word tense is simply an English form of the French word for time.?

²⁸ The past tense is often called the preterite (from a Latin word meaning “gone by”). Preterite is in some ways a better name for the tense than past, since both the perfect and the pluperfect tenses also refer to past time.?

²⁹ Silent final e is not counted as an ending.?

³⁰ Notice also the change from v to f before t.?

³¹ The ending ed indicates tense, not person or number.?

³² The second person singular is often given as “Thou walkest or You walk,” but it is simpler to regard You walk in this use as a plural in a singular sense (§224).?

³³ This rule is not absolute. Sometimes the distinction is unimportant, and the feeling of the moment often determines the number of the verb.?

³⁴ So I can strike, etc.?

³⁵ So I could strike, etc.?

³⁶ So I can have struck, etc.?

³⁷ So I could have struck, etc.?

³⁸ For the so-called infinitive clause, in which the infinitive has a subject of a peculiar kind, see §§324–328.?

³⁹ After verbs of wishing, etc., they express purpose (§403); after verbs of believing, etc., they are in indirect discourse (§431).?

⁴⁰ The only exceptions are trifling differences in spelling.?

⁴¹ CoÖrdinate conjunctions are also called coÖrdinating, and subordinate conjunctions are also called subordinating.?

⁴² Compare the exclamatory sentence (§3) and the exclamatory nominative (§88, 4).?

⁴³ Including clauses of manner and degree (§§428–429).?

⁴⁴ By “if-clause” is meant the protasis, whatever the conjunction.?

⁴⁵ Clauses introduced by as are often called clauses of manner.?

⁴⁶ Such sentences are elliptical in origin. Thus, “The man acts as if he were crazy” is equivalent to “The man acts as [he would act] if he were crazy.” But it is not necessary to supply the ellipsis in analyzing.?

⁴⁷ In analyzing, the direct quotation may be regarded as the object of the verb of saying, etc. (or the subject, if that verb is passive); and if it forms a complete sentence, this may be analyzed as if it stood by itself. It is not proper to regard the direct quotation as a subordinate clause.?

⁴⁸ See pp.102–105, 127–132.?

⁴⁹ Instead of compound complex, the term complex compound is often used. The terms are synonymous, both meaning “compound in general structure, but complex in one or more members.”?

⁵⁰ Or parse the nominatives according to the models in §112.?

⁵¹ For exercises in the use of the comparative and the superlative, see pp.249–250, 252.?

⁵² The omission of a form from the list, then, does not necessarily indicate that it is wrong or even objectionable. There is considerable diversity of usage with regard to the strong verbs, and to state the facts at length would take much space. An attempt to include archaic, poetical, and rare forms in the same list with the usual modern forms is sure to mislead the pupil. Hence the list here presented is confined to forms about whose correctness there can be no difference of opinion. Archaic and poetical tense-forms are treated later (pp.297–299).?

⁵³ Born is used only in the passive sense of “born into the world.”?

⁵⁴ The adjective form is bereaved: as, “The bereaved father.”?

⁵⁵ Cleave, “to adhere,” has cleaved in both the past tense and the past participle, and also an archaic past form clave.?

⁵⁶ The archaic participle gotten is used in the compounds begotten and forgotten, and as an adjective (“ill-gotten gains”). Many good speakers also use it instead of the past participle got, but got is the accepted modern form.?

⁵⁷ Hanged is used only of execution by hanging.?

⁵⁸ Usage varies with the context. We say, “The crew hove the cargo overboard,” but NOT “She hove a sigh.”?

⁵⁹ Load has loaded in both the past tense and the past participle. Laden is sometimes used as the past participle of load.?

⁶⁰ Lie, “to tell a falsehood,” has lied in both the past tense and the past participle.?

⁶¹ So both light, “to kindle,” and light, “to alight.” The verb alight has usually alighted in both the past tense and the past participle.?

⁶² Seethe, intransitive, has usually seethed in both the past tense and the past participle. It is in rather common literary use.?

⁶³ Stricken is also used as a participle in a figurative sense. Thus we say, “The community was stricken with pestilence,”—but “The dog was struck with a stick.”?

⁶⁴ It is a remnant of the old past plural. In Anglo-Saxon the principal parts of begin were: present, beginne; past, began; past plural, begunnon; past participle, begunnen.?

⁶⁵ The adjectives are usually pronounced blessÈd, cursÈd. Compare also the adjective accursÈd.?

⁶⁶ Both forms are in good use.?

⁶⁷ Both forms are in good use. The adjective is pronounced learnÈd.?

⁶⁸ The main rules of punctuation are well fixed and depend on important distinctions in sentence structure and consequently in thought. In detail, however, there is much variety of usage, and care should be taken not to insist on such uniformity in the pupils’ practice as is not found in the printed books which they use. If young writers can be induced to indicate the ends of their sentences properly, much has been accomplished.?

⁶⁹ It is not meant, of course, that an American or Australian of the present day should exert himself to imitate the speech of a modern Londoner. The point is, that what we now call “English” is, in most respects, the direct descendant of the London dialect of the fourteenth century.?