The English Language Part 67

In the old language impersonal verbs, or rather the impersonal use of verbs, was commoner than at present.

Him _oughten_ now to have the lese pain.

_Legend of Good Women_, 429.

{343}

Him _ought_ not to be a tyrant.

_Legend of Good Women_, 377.

Me mete.--CHAUCER.

Well me quemeth.--_Conf. Amantis._

In the following lines the construction is, _it shall please your Majesty_.

I'll muster up my friends to meet your Grace, Where and what time your Majesty shall please.

_Richard III_., iv. 4.

See a paper of Mr. Guest's, Phil. Trans., vol. ii. 241.

Strictly speaking, the impersonal verbs are a part of syntax rather than of etymology.

{344}

CHAPTER XXVIII.

THE VERB SUBSTANTIVE.

-- 395. The verb substantive is generally dealt with as an irregular verb.

This is inaccurate. The true notion is that the idea of _being_ or _existing_ is expressed by four different verbs, each of which is defective in some of its parts. The parts, however, that are wanting in one verb, are made up by the inflections of one of the others. There is, for example, no praeterite of the verb _am_, and no present of the verb _was_. The absence, however, of the present form of _was_ is made up by the word _am_, and the absence of the praeterite form of _am_ is made up by the word _was_.

-- 396. _Was._--Defective, except in the praeterite tense, where it is found both in the indicative and conjunctive.

_Indicative._ | _Conjunctive._ | _Sing._ _Plur._ | _Sing._ _Plur._ | 1. Was. Were. | 1. Were. Were.

2. Wast. Were. | 2. Wert. Were.

3. Was. Were. | 3. Were. Were.

In the older stages of the Gothic languages the word has both a full conjugation and a regular one. In Anglo-Saxon it has an infinitive, a participle present, and a participle past. In Moeso-Gothic it is inflected throughout with _-s_; as _visa_, _vas_, _vesum_, _visans_. In that language it has the power of the Latin _maneo_ = _to remain_. The _-r_ first appears in the Old High German; _wisu_, _was_, _warumes_, _wesaner_. In Norse the _s_ entirely disappears, and the word is inflected with _r_ throughout; _vera_, _var_, _vorum_, &c.

-- 397. _Be._--Inflected in Anglo-Saxon throughout the present tense, both indicative and subjunctive; found also as an {345} infinitive _beon_, as a gerund to _beonne_, and as a participle _beonde_. In the present English its inflection is as follows:--

_Present._

_Indicative._ | _Conjunctive._ | _Imperative._ _Sing._ _Plur._ | _Sing._ _Plur._ | _Sing._ _Plur._ | | 1. -- -- | Be. Be. | -- -- 2. Beest. -- | Beest? Be. | Be. Be.

3. -- -- | Be. Be, Bin. | -- -- | | _Infin._ To be. _Pres. P._ Being. _Past Part._ Been.

The line in Milton beginning _If thou beest he_--(P. L. b. ii.), leads to the notion that the antiquated form _beest_ is not indicative, but conjunctive. Such, however, is not the case: _bst_ in Anglo-Saxon is indicative, the conjunctive form being _beo_.--_And every thing that pretty bin_ (Cymbeline).--Here the word _bin_ is the conjunctive plural, in Anglo-Saxon _beon_; so that the words _every thing_ are to be considered equivalent to the plural form _all things_. The phrase in Latin would stand thus, _quotquot pulcra sint_; in Greek thus, [Greek: ha an kala ei]. The _indicative_ plural is, in Anglo-Saxon, not _beon_, but _beo_ and _beo_.

-- 398. In the Deutsche Grammatik, i. 1051, it is stated that the Anglo-Saxon forms _beo_, _bist_, _bi_, _beo_, or _beo_, have not a present, but a future sense; that whilst _am_ means _I am_, _beo_ means _I shall be_; and that in the older languages it is only where the form _am_ is not found that _be_ has the power of a present form. The same root occurs in the Slavonic and Lithuanic tongues with the same power; as, _esmi_=_I am_; _busu_=_I shall be_, Lithuanic.--_Esmu_=_I am_; _buhshu_=_I shall be_, Livonic.--_Jesm_=_I am_; _budu_=_I shall be_, Slavonic.--_Gsem_=_I am_; _budu_=_I shall be_, Bohemian. This, however, proves, not that there is in Anglo-Saxon a future tense (or form), but that the word _beo_ has a future sense. There is no fresh tense where there is no fresh form.

The following is a specimen of the future power of _beon_ in Anglo-Saxon:--"_Hi ne _beo_ na cilde, solice, on domesdaege, ac _beo_ swa micele menn swa swa hi, migton beon gif hi full weoxon on gewunlicre ylde._"--aelfric's Homilies. "They _will not_ be children, forsooth, on Domesday, but _will be_ as much {346} (so muckle) men as they might be if they were full grown (waxen) in customary age."

-- 399. If we consider the word _beon_ like the word _weoran_ (see below) to mean not so much _to be_ as to _become_, we get an element of the idea of futurity. Things which are _becoming anything_ have yet something further to either do or suffer. Again, from the idea of futurity we get the idea of contingency, and this explains the subjunctive power of _be_. In English we often say _may_ for _shall_, and the same was done in Anglo-Saxon.--"_Ic e secge, he is be am huse e Fegor hatte, and nan man nis e hig wite_ (_shall, may know_) _aer am myclan dome_."--aelfric's Homilies, 44.

-- 400. _Am._--Of this form it should be stated, that the letter _-m_ is no part of the original word. It is the sign of the first person, just as it is in all the Indo-European languages.

It should also be stated, that, although the fact be obscured, and although the changes be insufficiently accounted for, the forms _am_, _art_, _are_, and _is_, are not, like _am_ and _was_, parts of different words, but forms of one and the same word; in other terms, that, although between _am_ and _be_ there is no etymological connexion, there is one between _am_ and _is_. This we collect from the comparison of the Indo-European languages.

1. 2. 3.

Sanskrit _Asmi._ _Asi._ _Asti._ Zend _Ahmi._ _Ani._ _Ashti_.

Greek [Greek: Eimi]. [Greek: Eis]. [Greek: Ei].

Latin _Sum._ _Es._ _Esti._ Lithuanic _Esmi._ _Essi._ _Esti._ Old Slavonic _Yesmy._ _Yesi._ _Yesty._ Moeso-Gothic _Im._ _Is._ _Ist._ Old Saxon -- [58]_Is._ _Ist._ Anglo-Saxon _Eom._ _Eart._ _Is._ Icelandic _Em._ _Ert._ _Er._ English _Am_. _Art._ _Is._

In English and Anglo-Saxon the word is found in the {347} present indicative only. In English it is inflected through both numbers; in Anglo-Saxon in the singular number only. The Anglo-Saxon plurals are forms of the German _seyn_, a verb whereof we have, in the present English, no vestiges.

_Worth._--In the following lines of Scott, the word _worth_=_is_, and is a fragment of the regular Anglo-Saxon verb _weoran_=_to be_, or _to become_; German, _werden_.

Woe _worth_ the chase, woe _worth_ the day, That cost thy life, my gallant grey.

_Lady of the Lake._

{348}

CHAPTER XXIX.

THE PRESENT PARTICIPLE.

-- 401. The present participle, called also the active participle and the participle in _-ing_, is formed from the original word by adding _-ing_; as, _move_, _moving_. In the older languages the termination was more marked, being _-nd_. Like the Latin participle in _-ns_, it was originally declined. The Moeso-Gothic and Old High German forms are _habands_ and _hapenter_=_having_, respectively. The _-s_ in the one language, and the _-er_ in the other, are the signs of the case and gender. In the Old Saxon and Anglo-Saxon the forms are _-and_ and _-ande_; as _bindand_, _bindande_=_binding_. In all the Norse languages, ancient and modern, the _-d_ is preserved. So it is in the Old Lowland Scotch, and in many of the modern provincial dialects of England, where _strikand_, _goand_, is said for _striking_, _going_. In Staffordshire, where the _-ing_ is p.r.o.nounced _-ingg_, there is a fuller sound than that of the current English. In Old English the form in _-nd_ is predominant, in Middle English, the use fluctuates, and in New English the termination _-ing_ is universal. In the Scotch of the modern writers we find the form _-in_.

The rising sun o'er Galston muirs Wi' glorious light was glintin'; The hares were hirplin' down the furs, The lav'rocks they were chantin'.

BURNS' _Holy Fair_.

It is with the oblique cases of the present participles of the cla.s.sical languages, rather than with the nominative, that we must compare the corresponding participle in Gothic; _e.g._, {349} [Greek: echont-os]

(_ekhontos_), Greek; _habent-is_, Latin; _hapent-er_, Old High German.

-- 402. It has often been remarked that the participle is used in many languages as a substantive. This is true in Greek,