Part 294 (1/2)

[288] _Sate_ for the preterit of _sit_, and _sitten_ for the perfect participle, are, in ood use Yet several recent gra whom are Crombie, Lennie, Bullions, and M'Culloch Dr Croh formerly in use, is now obsolescent Laudable attempts, however, have been made to restore it”--_On Etymol and Syntax_, p 199 Lennie says, ”Many authors, both here and in America, use _sate_ as the Past time of _sit_; but this is ilut _Sitten_ and _spitten_ are preferable [to _sat_ and _spit_,]

though obsolescent”--_Principles of E Gram_, p 45 Bullions says, ”_Sitten_ and _spitten_ are nearly obsolete, though preferable to _sat_ and _spit_”--_Principles of E Gra form: ”Sit, sat, sitten _or_ sat Spit, spit _or_ spat, spit _or_ spitten”--_Manual of E Gram_, p 65

[289] ”He will find the political hobby which he has _bestrided_ no child's nag”--_The Vanguard, a Newspaper_

”Through the pressed nostril, spectacle-_bestrid_”--_Cowper_

”A lank haired hunter _strided_”--_Whittier's Sabbath Scene_

[290] In the age of Pope, _writ_ was frequently used both for the participle and for the preterit of this verb It is now either obsolete or peculiar to the poets In prose it seear: as, ”He _writ_ it, at least, published it, in 1670”--_Barclay's Works_, Vol i, p 77

”He, who, supreht boldly censure, as he boldly _writ_”--_Pope, Ess on Crit_

Dr Croo, that, ”_Wrote_ as the Participle [of _Write_,] is generally disused, and likewise _writ_”--_Treatise on Etym and Synt_, p 202

[291] A word is not necessarily _ungra a rival forular words, _beseeched, blowed, bursted, digged, freezed, bereaved, hanged, lish, though we find them all condemned by some critics

[292] ”And the man in whom the evil spirit was, _leapt_ on them”--FRIENDS'

BIBLE: _Acts_, xix, 16 In Scott's Bible, and several others, the word is ”_leaped_” Walker says, ”The past ti short; and if so, it ought to be spelled _leapt_, rhy with _kept_”--_Walker's pron Dict, w Leap_ Worcester, who improperly pronounces _leaped_ in tays, ”l~ept or l=ept,” _ht to be spelled _lept_”--_Universal and Critical Dict, w Leap_ In the solemn style, _leaped_ is, of course, two syllables As for _leapedst_ or _leaptest_, I know not that either can be found

[293] _Acquit_ is alularly, thus: _acquit, acquitted, acquitting, acquitted_ But, like _quit_, it is soular form also; which, if it be allowable, will make it redundant: as, ”To be _acquit_ from my continual smart”--SPENCER: _Johnson's Dict_ ”The writer holds hiard”--_Judd, on the Revolutionary War_, p 5 ”I alad I am so _acquit_ of this tinder-box”--SHAK

[294]

”Not know my voice! O, time's extreue?”

--SHAK: _Com of Er_

[295] _Whet_ is made redundant in Webster's American Dictionary, as well as in Wells's Graular form of it is well authorized

[296] In S W Clark's Practical Grah pretensions, and prepared expressly ”for the education of Teachers”--_sixty-three_ out of the foregoing ninety-five Redundant Verbs, are treated as having no regular or no irregular for twenty-nine are _oular_; belay, bet, betide, blend, bless, curse, dive, dress, geld, lean, leap, learn, mulet, pass, pen, plead, prove, rap, reave, roast, seethe, smell, spoil, stave, stay, wake, het, wont (2) The following thirty-four are _given_ by hiular_; abide, bend, beseech, blow, burst, catch, chide, creep, deal, freeze, grind, hang, knit, lade, lay, mean, pay, shake, sleep, slide, speed, spell, spill, split, string, strive, sweat, sweep, thrive, throeave, weep, ind Thirty-two of the ninety-five are h not so called in his book

In Wells's School Grammar, ”the 113th Thousand,” dated 1850, the deficiencies of the foregoing kinds, if I aular Verbs” has forty-four Redundants, to which he assigns a regular forht than Clark, as this number surpasses thirty-two, and comes towards ninety-five The words about which they differ, are--_pen, seethe_, and _whet_, of the for, knit, spell, spill, sweat_, and _thrive_, of the latter

[297] In the following exay, which seems not so well suited to the sense: ”But we _ and expressive, by a constant and multiplied use of epithets”--_Blair's Rhet_, p 287 Here, in stead of ”_be aware_,” the author should have said, ”_beware_,” or ”_be ware_;” that is, be _wary_, or _cautious_; for _aware_ means _apprised_, or _informed_, a sense very different from the other

[298] Dr Croht_ are used only in the present tense (See his _Treatise_, p 204) In this he is wrong, especially with regard to the latter word Lennie, and his copyist Bullions, adopt the same notion; but Murray, and many others, suppose thenification”

[299] Dr Crombie says, ”This Verb, as an auxiliary, is _inflexible_; thus we say, 'he _will_ go;' and 'he _wills to_ go'”--_Treatise on Etym and Syntax_, p 203 He should have confined his remarks to the _familiar style_, in which all the auxiliaries, except _do, be_, and _have_, are inflexible For, in the soleo”

[300] ”HAD-I-WIST A proverbial expression, _Oh_ that I had known

_Gower_”--_Chalmers's Dict_, also _Webster's_ In this phrase, which is here needlessly compounded, and not very properly explained, we see _wist_ used as a perfect participle But the word is obsolete ”_Had I wist_,” is therefore an obsolete phrase,If I had known, or, ”_O_ that I had known”

[301] That is, passive verbs, as well as others, have three participles for each; so that, from one active-transitive root, there come _six_ participles--three active, and three passive Those nurammarians who, like Lindley Murray, make passive verbs a distinct class, for the most part, very properly state the participles of a _verb_ to be ”_three_;” but, to represent the two voices as modifications of one species of verbs, and then say, ”The Participles are _three_,” as many recent writers do, is manifestly absurd: because _two threes should be six_ Thus, for exalish [,] the _transitive_ verb has always _two voices_, the Active and [the] Passive”--_Prin of E Gram_, p 33 ”The Participles are _three_, [:] the Present, the _Perfect_, and the _Coain: ”_Transitive_ verbs have two voices, called the _Active_ and the _Passive_”--_Bullions's analyt and Pract

Gram_, p 66 ”Verbs have _three_ participles--the _present_, the _past_, and the _perfect_; as, _loving, loved, having loved_, in the active voice: AND _being loved, loved, having been loved_, in the passive”--_Ib_, p

76 Now either not all these are the participles of _one_ verb, or that verb has _more than three_ Take your choice Redundant verbs usually have _duplicate forms_ of all the participles except the Ihted_ or _having lit_; so again, _being lighted_ or _being lit, lighted_ or _lit, having been lighted_ or _having been lit_

[302] The diversity in the _application_ of these nanized in different grammars, is quite as reeneral synopsis of this discordant teaching, no man will probably think it worth his while