Part 58 (1/2)

In those languages the forular of the praeterite tense of one conjugation is, not _-s_, but _-t_; as Moeso-Gothic, _svor_=_I swore_, _svort_=_thou swarest_, _graip_=_I griped_, _graipt_=_thou gripedst_; Icelandic, _brannt_=_thou burnest_, _gaft_=_thou_ {299} _gavest_ In the saated like praeterites Of these, in each language, _skal_ is one

_Moeso-Gothic_

_Singular_ _Dual_ _Plural_ 1 Skal Skulu Skulum

2 Skalt Skuluts Skulu

3 Skall Skuluts Skulun

_Icelandic_

_Singular_ _Plural_ 1 Skall Skulum

2 Skalt Skulu

3 Skal Skulu

-- 353 _Thou spakest, thou brakest, thou sungest_[45]--In these for to the class of verbs which for the vowel of the present; as _sing_, _sang_, &c Now, all words of this sort in Anglo-Saxon forular praeterite, not in _-st_, but in _-e_; as _u funde_=_thou foundest_, _u sunge_=_thou sungest_ The English termination is derived from the present Observe that this applies only to the praeterites forlo-Saxon as well as English, _viz_, _u lufodest_

-- 354 In the northern dialects of the Anglo-Saxon the - of plurals like _lufia_=_we love_ becoe was still more prevalent:

The Scottes come that to this day _Havys_, and Scotland haldyn ay

WINTOUN, 11 9 73

Jaland ends nearly all his plurals in _-s_

{300}

CHAPTER XX

ON THE NUMBERS OF VERBS

-- 355 The inflection of the present tense, not only in Anglo-Saxon, but in several other languages as well, has been given in the preceding chapter

As compared with the present plural forlo-Saxon _we lufia_, _ge lufia_, _hi lufia_, and the Old English _we loven_, _ye loven_, _they loven_, have a peculiar tere wants In other words, the Anglo-Saxon and the Old English have a plural _personal_ characteristic, whilst the Modern English has nothing to correspond with it

The word _personal_ is printed in italics It does not follow, that, because there is no plural _personal_ characteristic, there is also no plural characteristic

There is no reason against the inflection of the word _love_ running thus--_I love_, _thou lovest_, _he loves_; _we lave_, _ye lave_, _they lave_; in other words, there is no reason against the vowel of the root being changed with the number In such a case there would be no _personal_ inflection, though there would be a plural, or a _nureat number of verbs such a plural inflection not only actually takes place, but takes place ularly It takes place, however, in the past tense only And this is the case in all the Gothic languages as well as in Anglo-Saxon Ast the rest, in--

_Moeso-Gothic_

Skain, _I shone_; skinum, _we shone_

Smait, _I smote_; smitum, _we s, _I lied_; luguave_