UC-NRLF 
 
 
 SB 1M 7SD 
 
LIBRARY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. 
 
 OF" 
 
 Class 
 
 ' -, 
 
THE INFLECTION OF THE ENGLISH 
 PRESENT PLURAL INDICATIVE 
 
 WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE 
 NORTHERN DIALECT 
 
 A DISSERTATION 
 
 SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD OF UNIVERSITY STUDIES OF 
 
 THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY IN CONFORMITY 
 
 WITH THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE 
 
 OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 
 
 BY 
 
 JOHN DAVID RODEFFER 
 
 BALTIMORE: 
 
 JOHN MURPHY COMPANY 
 1903 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE. 
 
 PREFACE v 
 
 INTRODUCTION. A BRIEF SURVEY OF THE VIEWS CONCERNING THE ORIGIN 
 AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE MIDDLE ENGLISH INFLECTION OF THE 
 
 PRESENT INDICATIVE PLURAL 1 
 
 A. THE INFLECTION OF THE PRESENT PLURAL INDICATIVE IN THE 
 
 SOUTH 2 
 
 B. THE INFLECTION OF THE PRESENT PLURAL INDICATIVE IN THE 
 
 MIDLAND 13 
 
 C. THE INFLECTION OF THE PRESENT PLURAL INDICATIVE IN THE 
 
 NORTH 23 
 
 I. The Leading Explanations of the Northern Inflections 23 
 
 II. The Historical Development of the Northern Inflections of the Present 
 
 Plural Indicative 30 
 
 1. The Old Northumbrian 30 
 
 The Durham Ritual. 30 
 
 The Lindisfarne Gospels. Matthew 33 
 
 Mark 34 
 
 Luke 34 
 
 John 35 
 
 2. The Middle Northern 38 
 
 Cursor Mundi 38 
 
 The Surtees Psalter 40 
 
 Richard Rolle's Pricke of Conscience 42 
 
 Richard Rolle's Prose Treatises. 44 
 
 The North English Legends 44 
 
 Ywain and Gawain 46 
 
 Lawrence Minot's Poems 47 
 
 The Lay Folks' Catechism 47 
 
 The York Plays 48 
 
 The Towneley Plays 50 
 
 Wyntoun's Orygynale CronyUl 51 
 
 Gilbert of the Haye's The JBuke of the Law of Armys, 
 
 or Buke of Bataillis 52 
 
 Barbour's Bruce 53 
 
 Robert Henryson's Poems 54 
 
 Dunbar' s The Tua Mariit Wemen and the Wedo 54 
 
 The New Testament in Scots. St. Luke 55 
 
 Gavin Douglas. Translation of the Aeneid 56 
 
 The Complaynt of Scotlande 58 
 
 Sir David Lyndsay. The Dreme and The Testament 
 
 and Complaynt of the Papyngo 58 
 
 Additional Texts 60 
 
 CONCLUSION 61 
 
 iii 
 
 
 142 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 When the study of historical English grammar became a 
 comparatively exact science, there was felt to be a need for an in- 
 vestigation of the dialectal inflection of the present indicative plural. 
 The long-continued labors of Morris marked such an advance in 
 our knowledge of English grammar that since his day the inflection 
 of the present plural indicative has been regarded as one of the 
 chief tests of dialect. But important though the establishment of 
 the facts was, its value was somewhat impaired by the failure to 
 explain historically the dialectal forms of this inflection. Such an 
 explanation becomes all the more imperative in the case of the 
 Midland, since it is from this dialect that our modern uninflected 
 present plural indicative is derived. 
 
 But it is in regard to the Northern dialect that the greatest 
 uncertainty has prevailed among special investigators, in spite of 
 the valuable positive results obtained by Murray. For example, 
 in Skeat's edition of the Kingis Quair (S. T. S., 1884, p. xxx) 
 the following assertion is made concerning the form stenten in the 
 line, And quhen I wepe } and stenten othir quhile : 'It is a transla- 
 tion into Chaucerian language of the Northern word styntis, for, 
 in the Northern dialect, the phrases I stintis and we stintis were 
 once equally correct.' The reader is here led into the belief that 
 in the Northern dialect the inflected form in -s was used when the 
 verb was in contact with a personal pronominal subject, whereas 
 in point of fact the uninflected form was required, just as in 
 Modern English. He is further confirmed in this erroneous im- 
 pression by a similar assertion in G. Schleich's Ywain and Gawain 
 (Oppeln and Leipzig, 1887, p. xvin) : < Moreover the ending -s, 
 -es occurs repeatedly, although never assured by the rime : compare 
 we suffers, 3044 ; ye thinkes, 1530,' etc. 
 
 Even as late as 1898, not mere vagueness of knowledge but 
 positive inaccuracy of a fundamental kind was shown by this 
 paradigm in the Specimens of Early English (Morris and Skeat, 
 
 v 
 
vi Preface. 
 
 Fourth edition, Oxford, 1898, p. xxxi) : ' Plural 1. love; 2. 
 loves ; 3. love ; loves.' Since no explanation is made why a North 
 countryman says we love but ye loves, and, at the same time, either 
 they love or they loves, the student is left to the possible inference 
 that the inflections of the third person represent a sort of arith- 
 metical summing up of the forms of the other two persons. 
 
 Finally, it must be urged that writers who recognize the influence 
 of a personal pronominal subject upon the form of the verb with 
 which it is in contact, should be more careful as to the manner of 
 presenting Northern constructions, whether to the eye of the special 
 student or to that of the general reader. G. Gregory Smith (Speci- 
 mens of the Middle Scots, Edinburgh, 1902, p. xxxv) very truth- 
 fully declares that ' The error that all the persons in the Northern 
 present tense are the same and in -s still holds in the text-books ' ; 
 yet on the same page he gives as the inflections of the different 
 persons when . the nominative is not a personal pronoun or when 
 the verb is remote from its personal pronominal subject : Ifyndis, 
 thow fyndis, he fyndis, we fyndis, ye fyndis, thay fyndis. Such a 
 method of presentation can not be distinguished from the errors 
 cited at first and should be systematically avoided, since only the 
 second and the third of the forms given here actually occur in the 
 original texts. 
 
INTRODUCTION.-A BRIEF SURVEY OP THE 
 VIEWS CONCERNING THE ORIGIN AND 
 DEVELOPMENT OP THE .MIDDLE 
 ENGLISH INFLECTIONS OP 
 THE PRESENT INDICA- 
 TIVE PLURAL. 
 
 Before the appearance of Matzner's grammar in I860, the view 
 concerning the varying forms assumed by the present indicative 
 plural of the verb in Anglo-Saxon is well represented by Bos worth 
 and Eask. The former in his Anglo-Saxon Grammar (London, 
 1823, p. 146 ff.), expresses himself to this effect : 
 
 ' When the infinitive ends in -an with a vowel before it, the plural 
 persons end in -iaft : as, hingrian, to hunger, hingriaft, we, ye, they 
 hunger ; loyrian, to curse, ivyriaft, we, ye, they curse. If it end in -eon, 
 they are formed in -eoft : as, geseon, to see, geseoft, we, ye, they see ; but 
 if a consonant goes before -an, then they end in -08 : as, pyrstan, to 
 thirst, pyrstaft, we, ye, they thirst. The plural persons also end in -en, 
 -on, -un, as well as -aft : as, witun, witaft, ye wot, or know ; nyton, 
 nuuton, nytaft, ye know not. It is sometimes read wutas, ye know, and 
 by the poets wutoft, for they often use the termination -oft instead of -aft. 
 The plural persons often end in the same manner as the first person 
 singular, especially when the Saxon pronoun is placed after the verb : 
 as, Hwcet ete ive, what shall we eat ; Hu fleo ge, how shall you fly.' 
 
 In like manner Rask explains the varying forms (Grammar of 
 the Anglo-Saxon Tongue, translated by B. Thorpe, Copenhagen, 
 1830, p. 71) : 
 
 ' The two terminations of the plural indicative and imperative are 
 thus distinguished : the first form in -aft is used when the pronoun, as 
 subject, precedes or is omitted; but the other form in -e when the 
 pronoun follows.' 
 
 On page 170, Rask treats of dialectal forms : 
 
 ' In Northumbrian -s is often used, instead of -ft or -p, in the termina- 
 natiou of verbs. Here it also appears that the difference between -aft 
 and -e in the plural is lost.' 
 
 1 
 
2 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 The first edition of Matzner's Englische Grammatik (Berlin, 
 1860, I, 323) does not much advance our knowledge of the dialec- 
 tal forms of the present indicative plural. After a paradigm of 
 the Anglo-Saxon [West-Saxon] forms of the full verb, Matzner 
 (as I translate) has the following : 
 
 The suffixes of the Anglo-Saxon are subjected to various alterations 
 and substitutions in English. . . . The three persons of the indicative 
 plural present appear as -eth, seldom -oth or -uth : We honourep Venus 
 (Robert of Gloucester, I, 112). . . . Later, however, there occur -es 
 and -is, -ys beside -eth, especially in the North, where the forms fall 
 together with the third person singular : We er richer men than he, and 
 mor gode haues (Percy Eel., p. 93, u). ... At an early date the 
 plural suffix -en, which belonged to the subjunctive, appears in the 
 indicative as well as in the subjunctive. 
 
 In the second edition (1873), only the last sentence has been 
 noticeably modified : 
 
 At an early date the plural suffix -en appears in the indicative, 
 especially in the Midland, as in the Low German dialects, so that the 
 indicative seems to be connected with the Anglo-Saxon subjunctive 
 forms, or at least falls together with them : We hauen misdo milcel 
 (Havelok, 2798) ; Now we leuen Joseph, and of pe kyng carpen (Joseph 
 of Arimathie, 175). The interchange of plural forms in -en, -es, -eth 
 and forms with the final consonant dropped takes place gradually : In 
 glotonye Go thei to bedde And risen with ribaudie (Alliterative Poems, 
 85). . . . Already in the fourteenth century the loss of the inflec- 
 tional ending has become widespread ; the ending -en disappears earlier 
 from the subjunctive and the indicative than the ending -eth from the 
 latter. 
 
 The third edition of Matzner (1880) repeats the second without 
 variation in all that is said concerning the inflection of the present 
 indicative plural. 
 
 Fiedler (Wissenschaftliche Grammatik der englischen Sprache, 
 Leipzig, 1861, p. 47) accounts in the following manner for the 
 form -en in the present indicative : 
 
 The inflection of the present indicative plural is still [1100-1250] 
 -eft : we habbeft, uo clepiaft, besides which there also appears the inor- 
 ganic ending -en. It was probably carried over from the preterit into 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 3 
 
 the indicative and is already the usual inflection in the Proverbs of 
 Alfred and the semi-Saxon homilies. 
 
 Koch attempts an historical explanation of the regular West- 
 Saxon plural form in his Historische G-rammatik der englischen 
 Sprache (Weimar, 1863, I, p. 336) : 
 
 In Old Saxon and Anglo-Saxon there is found for the three persons 
 only one sign ; the former has in the present indicative -d, the latter 
 -ft. Old Saxon -d corresponds to the Gothic -and and would therefore 
 be -ad ; the Anglo-Saxon would correspond in the second plural to the 
 Gothic -ip and it is surprising that in the older tongue the i should 
 appear weakened, whereas the Anglo-Saxon retains -op. 
 
 Koch (p. 335) notes that s-forms occur in Northumbrian in the 
 indicative plural, which he regards as a degeneration (Entartung) 
 of the forms in -p. 
 
 In the same year that was marked by the appearance of Koch's 
 grammar, Morris wrote in his preface to Richard Rolle's Pricke 
 of Conscience (published in the Philological Society 1 s Early English 
 Volume) , p. XVIII : 
 
 ' The conjugation of the Northumbrian verb is extremely simple, 
 one form in s being used for every person in the present tense, indicative 
 mood. It is moreover a test by which Northumbrian may be dis- 
 tinguished from other dialects of the North of England. . . . We 
 have occasionally (thai) loven instead of (thai) loves. . . . The 
 Northumbrian has what may be called an uninflected imperative, 
 conjugated as follows : Ga I, ga thou, ga he; ga we, ga yhou, ga thai.' 
 
 Morris also gives grammatical prefaces for the West Midland in 
 Early English Alliterative Poems (E. E. T. S., 1) ; for the East 
 Midland in The Story of Genesis and Exodus (E. E. T. S., 7) and 
 Old English Homilies, Second Series (E. E. T. S., 53) ; for the 
 Southern in The Ayenbite of Inwyt (E. E. T. S., 23), Old English 
 Homilies, First Series (E. E. T. S., 29) ; and An Old English 
 Miscellany (E. E. T. S., 49). He has summed up the results of 
 his studies in the Historical Outlines of English Accidence (London, 
 1873, p. 173), where the inflections of the indicative plural present 
 
 are thus given: Southern eth; Midland en; Northern 1. 
 
 -(e) 2. -(e)s ; 3. -(e)s. A slight change in presenting these inflec- 
 
4 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 tions is seen in his Specimens of Early English (Oxford, 1882, 1, p. 
 xxxvii) : Northern 1. hopes; 2. hopes; 3. hopes. In a footnote 
 to this passage, Morris says the Northern dialect often drops the 
 -s in the first person, and the Midland the -n in all persons. 
 
 These paradigms are repeated without alteration in Specimens of 
 Early English (Morris and Skeat, Oxford, 1898, p. xix), but on 
 p. xxxi, the Northern present indicative plural is given as 1. 
 love ; 2. loves ; 3. love, loves. No explanation is offered, however, 
 for putting these double forms for the third plural. 
 
 The problem of the varying forms of the present indicative 
 plural in West-Saxon was discussed by Sweet in the introduction 
 to King Alfred's West-Saxon Version of Gregory's Pastoral Care 
 (E. E. T. S., 50, p. xxxii) : 
 
 ' Dropping of final generally inflectional n is very frequent in H 
 [Hatton MS.]. The n is frequently added above the line, but often 
 the correction is neglected, especially towards the end of the MS. It 
 is the n of the infinitive, weak adj. inflection, and subjunctive that 
 most frequently suffers this apocope. . . . Such forms as ne forbinden 
 ge (105. 7) are interesting as affording an explanation of the w r ell- 
 known difference of ending which depends on the relative position of 
 the verb and its personal pronoun. The frequent dropping of the final 
 n has been noticed above, we need not therefore be surprised at one 
 MS. having ne bredge ge, while the other retains the final n (173. 10, 
 compare also 189. 23). It seems not improbable that these curtailed 
 forms may have gradually extended their range, first appearing in 
 imperatives without the negation, and afterwards in all cases of 
 pronominal postposition. That the hcebbe ge, wese ge, etc. of the 
 grammars are of comparatively late origin is shown by the frequent 
 occurrence in the Pastoral of the fuller forms habbaft ge (95. 11), 
 weahsaft ge (109. 5), beoft ge (201. 21). An example of the later form 
 is beo ge (189. 22) in bothJMSS.' 
 
 A similar view is expressed by Sweet in An Anglo-Saxon Reader 
 (Oxford, 1881, p. Ix) and A New English Grammar (Oxford, 1892, 
 I, 365). 
 
 Substantially the same testimony is [given in Sievers's Angelsdch- 
 sische Grammatik (Halle, 1882, 360), repeated without alteration 
 in the second edition (1886) but modified and expanded in the third 
 edition (1898) [see below, Section C]. 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 5 
 
 Cosijn (Altwestsachsische GrammatiJc, Haag, 1888, n, p. 118) 
 also expresses himself to the same effect : 
 
 Wille we, wille ge, the imperative and preterit forms in -e (the latter 
 with indicative significance : ne spilcte ge) prove that we have to deal 
 here only with original forms in -n (-m) ; consequently -n and not -p 
 has been dropped. 
 
 The occurrence of the curtailed form in the preterit indicative 
 plural is explained by Cosijn as due to the preterit optative plural 
 used as an indicative, with the consequent dropping of -w in the 
 ending -en and not in -on. 
 
 The testimony of Sweet, Sievers, and Cosijn is further strength- 
 ened by that of Professor Bright (Anglo-Saxon Reader, Third 
 edition, New York, 1899, p. Ixii) : 
 
 ' When the pronominal subjects we, we, ge, ye, are placed immediately 
 after the verb, the verbal ending is often (not uniformly) reduced to -e. 
 Originally this form was in all probability restricted to the adhortative 
 optative ; the -e would therefore represent a reduction of -en. But in 
 the historic periods of West-Saxon the indie, pres. and pret. and the 
 Imperative (-aft and -on also giving way to -e) are found attracted into 
 this usage. 
 
 Thus, we (ge) cweftaft, but cwefte we (ge) ; we (ge) magon, but mage 
 we (ge) ; we (ge) nimen, but nime we (ge) ; we (ge) comon (sohtori), but 
 eome (sohte) we (ge).' 
 
A.-THE INFLECTION OP THE PRESENT PLURAL 
 INDICATIVE IN THE SOUTH. 
 
 To sum up the results of this cursory review, supplementing 
 with fresh material whenever expedient, we find in Early West- 
 Saxon a form -(a)$ that is used for the present indicative plural. 
 c The stroke of the $ ' is sometimes omitted, causing the ending to 
 appear as -(a)d, but this omission was clearly due to the carelessness 
 of the scribe. It is, therefore, not necessary to regard -(a)d as a 
 separate ending. 
 
 This form in -()$ is used with any subject in the plural, whether 
 noun, personal or relative pronoun, or pronominal adjective : 
 monige eac wise lareowas winnaft mid hira $eawum, Cura Pastor- 
 alls, 29, 21 ; ge/eo$, 3 JiydaK, 89, 14; a e willed to fela idles 
 j unnyttes gesprecan, 17, 4; fteahhwse^re monige wilniaft fol- 
 goSes, 47, 23. 
 
 It may also be used if the subject follows the verb : ac sona bioft 
 ftses modes eagan eft gewende, 56, 12 ; habbafi ge, 95, 11 ; weahsaft 
 ge, 109, 5. 
 
 The same form is used when the verb is separated from its 
 subject : iSonne hi $one godcundan wisdom liorniaft, 30, 4. 
 
 In addition to the ending -(a)$, there is a form in -e used in the 
 first and second persons of the present indicative plural, but with 
 a very limited range. It is never used when the subject precedes 
 or is separated from its verb. It may be used if the subject 
 follows the verb, but only on the condition that it be a personal 
 pronoun and be placed immediately after the verb : $onne hcebbe 
 we, 45, 12. But if the subject that follows the verb is a noun or 
 a pronominal adjective, the ending must be -()$. From this rule 
 there are no exceptions in the Cura Pastoralis. 
 
 We have, then, in Early West-Saxon two endings for the present 
 indicative plural, -(a)S and -e, the former being used with the 
 greatest possible freedom, the latter within a sharply defined and 
 limited range. But, as has been shown, the uses of the two are 
 not mutually exclusive. The scope of the -(a)$-forms is so wide as 
 to include that of the forms in -e ; or, more accurately stated, the 
 6 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 7 
 
 e-form had already begun in the time of Alfred to encroach on the 
 territory of the -(a)^-form without being able, however, to drive it 
 from the field. 
 
 This -e was not originally an ending of the plural indicative 
 but is a curtailment of the -en of the plural subjunctive. Since 
 the imperative proper had only one form in the plural, namely the 
 second person, the first and third persons were supplied from the 
 subjunctive. There is a trace of an old adhortative first plural in 
 -an in the imperative but this soon gave way to the corresponding 
 subjunctive, or optative, form in -en. The adhortative optative, 
 when intensified by stress, easily acquired a jussive sense. This 
 led to an extension of the optative forms to the second person 
 of the imperative, that is, to the imperative proper. The exten- 
 sion of subjunctive forms to the indicative was aided by willan, 
 itself originally an optative, the meaning l of which made it par- 
 ticularly adapted to mediate between the two moods. The use 
 of curtailed endings in the indicative was also facilitated by the 
 preteritive presents, in which the plural inflection -on lent itself 
 readily to leveling with the optative or to curtailment. 
 
 The encroachment of the optative on the imperative is con- 
 sidered in the following monographs. 
 
 M. Braunschweiger, Die Flexion des Verbums in ^Elfric's Gram- 
 matik (Marburg, 1890, p. 10). 
 
 C. Briihl, Die Flexion des Verbums in ^Elfric's Heptateuch und 
 Buch Hiob (Marburg, 1892, p. 11). 
 
 W. Fleischhauer, Ueber den Gebrauch des Conjunctivs in Alfred's 
 altengl. Uebersetzung von Gregorys Cura Pastoralis (Gottingen, 1889, 
 pp. 4-5). 
 
 O. Hennicke, Der Konjunktiv im Altenglischen (Gottingen, 1878, 
 pp. 11-12). 
 
 A. N. Henshaw, The Syntax of the Indicative and Subjunctive Moods 
 in the Anglo-Saxon Gospels (Leipzig-Reudnitz, 1894, pp. 9-10). 
 
 1 In this connection note the extension of an optative inflection to the second 
 singular of the preterit indicative in all the West-Germanic dialects (cf. Kluge, 
 Vorgeschichte der altgerm. Dialekte* | 199). The use of a diplomatic subjunctive 
 as an indicative may also account for ihr sdd in Modern German, and may prove 
 a better explanation of durfen, konnen, m'ogen, miissen, etc., than the theory of O. 
 Brenner (Beitr., XX, 84), who holds that the umlaut arose from postpositive wir, 
 ir, and sie. Note also mich (mir) deucht, which was originally a subjunctive. 
 
8 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 G. Hotz, On the Use of the Subjunctive Mood in Anglo-Saxon and 
 its further History in Old English (Zurich, 1882, pp. 13-16). 
 
 P. T. Kiihn, Die Syntax des Verbums in JElfrics Heiligenleben 
 (Leipzig-Reudnitz, 1889, p. 9). 
 
 M. Prollius, Ueber den syntactisehen Gebrauch des Conjunctivs in 
 den Cynewulfsehen Dichtungen, Elene, Juliana, und Crist (Marburg, 
 1888, p. 5). 
 
 W. Wandschneider, Zur Syntax des Verbs in Lang leys Vision of 
 William concerning Piers the Plowman (Leipzig, 1887, pp. 44-45 and 
 p. 58). 
 
 T. Wohlfahrt, Die Syntax des Verbums in jElfric's Uebersetzung des 
 Heptateuch und des Buches Hiob (Munchen, 1886, pp. 2-3). 
 
 Although both the forms -e and -en occur in the optative plural, 
 it is noteworthy that only the former occurs in the present indica- 
 tive plural in the Cura Pastoralis. The e-form is given for the 
 indicative by both manuscripts throughout, whereas they differ 
 eight times in their use of the subjunctive -e and -en. Of these, 
 five are negative : neforbinde ge (Cotton), neforbinden ge (Hatton), 
 105, 7 ; ne brede ge (C), ne bregden \jge~] (H), 173, 10 ; ne gremige 
 ge (C), ne gremigen ge (H), 189, 23; ne gewunige ge (C), ne 
 gew[u]nigen ge (H), 317, 18 ; and ne forlceten (C), ne forlcete (H), 
 136, 12. The other variants are : gearigen (C), gearige (H), 119, 5 ; 
 mcegen (C), mcege (H), 119, 5 ; and hcebben (C), hcebbe (H), 323, 1. 
 
 In addition to these, it should be noted that the manuscripts 
 differ twice in their use of the endings of the preterit plural : 
 gebrohte (C), gebrohten (H), 191, 8 ; and ftonne ceton ge (C), ftonne 
 cete ge (H), 317, 2. 
 
 Since the two manuscripts published by Sweet were written 
 in the reign of Alfred, 1 one would infer from these different forms, 
 varying often in the same manuscript, a that the older ending -en 
 in ne binden ive, occurring between two more strongly accented 
 
 1 See Sweet's Introduction, p. xvii. 
 
 2 Wiilfing (Die Syntax in den Werken Alfreds des Grossen, Bonn, 1894, I, 341) 
 says : ' Ich glaube, dass diese Verschiedenheiten nur auf der Willkiir der Schreiber 
 beruhen.' But this is not a sufficient reason. What was the cause of this caprice 
 of the scribes? The fact that similar vagaries do not reveal themselves in the 
 dropping of other inflections, as for instance -s or -$, argues for the existence of 
 a cause other than ' die Willkiir der Schreiber ' for the dropping or the retention 
 of this final -n. 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 9 
 
 syllables, 1 had already become -e, ne binde we, in actual pronun- 
 ciation. 
 
 From both manuscripts it is seen that the curtailed forms not 
 only predominate in adhortative-optative constructions, but are also 
 carried over into the indicative in not fewer than seventeen 
 instances : Hwset cwefte we ftonne, 175, 5 ; Hwset do ge, broftor, 
 do$ esnlice, 363, 2 ; We brucaft ures segnes, ne gitsige we nanes 
 o$res monnes, 337, 19. Of these seventeen cases, only three 
 express negation. 
 
 We see, moreover, from both manuscripts that the force of 
 analogy had caused the -e to be extended to the preteritive presents 
 in -on (including woldon) in six cases : hu durre we, 63, 6 ; hu feor 
 wolde ge, 331, 1. It was also analogically carried over to the -on 
 of the preterit indicative in six cases : nefceste ge, 317, 1. 
 
 In the late West-Saxon of .ZElfric and in the ElicMing Homilies 
 the inflection of the indicative plural present is the same as in that 
 of Alfred. There is still a tendency on the part of the jussive 
 subjunctive to supplant the imperative plural in -a%. 2 
 
 During the transition period from late West-Saxon to Middle 
 English, -a$ became first -ce$ and then -eiS in the latter part of the 
 twelfth century. E. Vogel (Zur Flexion des englischen Verbums im 
 XL und XII. Jahrhundert, Berlin, 1902, p. 25) gives -a& with 
 occasional -e3 as the ending of the plural indicative in MS. H 
 [Bodleian NE. F. IV. 12] of Wulfstan's homilies. According to 
 
 *A similar process occurs in Old Norse. The final -m of the first person 
 plural is very often dropped when the verb is immediately followed by the 
 pronouns vit (mil} or ver (mer) ; thus, Undo ver, we bind, for bindom ver. 
 
 Also in the second person plural, the final -"$ of the ending -ffi, -eft falls regu- 
 larly when the pronouns pit, per immediately follow : gefe per, you give, for gefeft 
 per. In this manner the pronouns pit and per were developed from the older 
 forms it and er (cf. Noreen, Altnordische Grammatik, I, 458 and $ 394, note 5). 
 
 The same process is seen in Middle High German. The -en of the first person 
 plural indicative is reduced to -e in gebe wir, lese wir. After a long syllable the 
 whole ending was frequently dropped. Already in Hartmann von Aue such 
 forms as grif wir, ver swig wir are found (cf. Weinhold, Mittelhochdeutsche Gram- 
 matik, Paderborn, 1883, \ 369; Paul, Mittelhochdeutsche Grammatik, Halle, 1894, 
 \ 155, note 2). 
 
 * C. Briihl, Die Flexion des Verbums in ^Elfrics Heptateuch und Buch Hiob (Mar- 
 burg, 1892, p. 11) ; G. Schwerdtfeger, Das schwache Verbum in jElfrics Homilien 
 (Marburg, 1893, p. 9). 
 
10 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 Napier (fiber die Werke des altenglischen Erzbischofs Wulfstan, 
 Weimar, 1882, p. 10), this manuscript dates from the middle of 
 the twelfth century. Other transitional texts illustrate the gradual 
 weakening of the vowel in the inflectional syllable. B. Buchholz 
 (Die Fragments der Reden der Seele an den Ldchnam, Erlanger 
 Beitrdge zur englischen Philologie, vi, p. xxix and p. Ixii) shows 
 that -eft is the regular ending of the present indicative plural in the 
 Worcester and the Oxford MSS., also of the twelfth century. In 
 only one instance does -aft occur. 
 
 In the first person plural of the adhortative optative, according 
 to Vogel, there occurs in Wulfstan's homilies no curtailment of the 
 ending before we, whereas in the first plural of the indicative the 
 curtailed form is the usual one before the postpositive pronoun 
 No parallel to this distinction is shown by the Ancren Riwle in 
 which the use of curtailed forms in pronominal postposition i& 
 invariable in the adhortative optative but not in the first plural 
 indicative. The distinction made by Wulfstan is also observed in 
 the Blickling Homilies, an earlier text, in which only one curtailed 
 form occurs in the adhortative optative. * In the two last-mentioned 
 texts the old optatival ending -en has been replaced by -an, which 
 is explained by Sievers as a borrowing of the ending of the preterit 
 optative which had previously been leveled with the preterit 
 indicative. 2 Vogel, however, with much more improbability, 
 prefers to see in the use of this form the influence of the second 
 weak conjugation in which the vowel of the present indicative 
 plural had been extended to the optative plural. 
 
 In all three of these texts, both the full form in -p and the 
 curtailed form are used in the indicative when the pronoun is 
 postpositive. Wulfstan shows a much larger percentage of cur- 
 tailed forms than do the Blickling Homilies and the Ancren Riwle. 
 In the second plural imperative Wulfstan and the Homilies may 
 have the full ^-form before the postpositive pronoun, although the 
 number of such forms in Wulfstan is very small. In the Ancren 
 Riwle, on the contrary, the curtailed form is used throughout. This 
 text even goes so far as to use the curtailed ending in the impera- 
 
 1 A. K. Hardy, Die Sprache der Blickling Homilien (Leipzig, 1899, p. 77). 
 8 Angelsdchsische Grammatik, % 361, note 1 and 365. 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 11 
 
 tive plural when the subject-pronoun is unexpressed. This use 
 probably originated in the omission of the pronoun because of the 
 contiguity of a following ge: as, loke pet ge habben, 418. The 
 next step was the omission of the second pronominal subject in 
 the case of two verbs in the same grammatical relation, especially 
 if the second had a pronominal object to aid in determining the 
 form of the verb : ne here ge non iren . . . nene beate ou per mide, 
 418. Finally, and this important question will be dealt with 
 more fully later, the curtailed form without a postpositive pronoun 
 became used independently : ne makie none purses . . . auh schep- 
 ie& ; ne gelde neuer uvel uor god, 186. This form bore a close 
 resemblance to the imperative singular and in later times, when 
 final -e came to lose its syllabic value, this use was responsible for 
 the apparent interchange of the singular and plural imperative in 
 the same discourse. 
 
 It is noteworthy that although the curtailed form is common 
 before we and ge, it does not occur before heo. This lack of 
 power on the part of the curtailed ending to extend itself to other 
 persons in the South is in marked contrast to the Northern usage in 
 extending the vocalic forms to l all cases of pronominal postposition ' * 
 and even to cases where the pronoun is prepositive. 
 
 In the A-text of Layamon's Brut 2 about 1200, The Owl and 
 Nightingale 3 about 1220, Robert of Gloucester's Chronicle 4 about 
 1300, and the Gloucestershire legends 5 of the same period, the 
 unconditioned indicative and imperative plural have the ^-ending. 
 With a postpositive pronoun, the curtailed ending is frequently, 
 but not invariably, used. In the legends of St. Editha and St. 
 Ethelreda written in Wiltshire in 1420, -eth appears in the indica- 
 
 1 This phrase of Sweet's [see p. 4 above] in the introduction to the Cura 
 Pastoralis is inapplicable to the South since curtailment here is restricted to the 
 first and second persons. 
 
 2 B. Callenberg, ' Layamon und Orm nach ihren Flexionsverhaltnissen vergli- 
 chen' (Herrig's Jrc^myLVii, 317 ff.). 
 
 3 H. Noelle, Die Sprache des altenglischen Gedichts von der Eule und Nachtigall 
 (Gottingen, 1870, p. 47). 
 
 4 F. Pabst, ' Flexionsverhaltnisse bei Kobert von Gloucester' (Anglia, xm, 202). 
 6 F. Mohr, Sprachliche Untersuchungen zu den miltelengl. Legenden aus Glouces- 
 tershire (Bonn, 1888, p. 65). 
 
12 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural 
 
 tive plural beside the more frequent -en. 1 The later use of -eth 
 in the indicative and the imperative can be more advantageously 
 considered in connection with the Midland dialect. 
 
 The inflection of the present indicative plural in the Kentish is 
 from the earliest times the same as that of the West-Saxon, in 
 contrast with the phonology of the Kentish which corresponds 
 more closely with that of the Mercian. The unconditioned indica- 
 tive and imperative plural have the inflection -eft in the Kentish 
 Gospels 2 of the twelfth century, the Sermons 5 of the thirteenth 
 century, and the Ayenbite of Inwyt* and the poems of William 
 of Shoreham 5 of the fourteenth century. When the pronoun is 
 postpositive, the curtailed ending may be used before we and ge in 
 both the indicative and the imperative. 
 
 1 W. Heuser, Die mittelengl Legenden von St. Editha und St. Ethelreda (Gottin- 
 gen, 1887, p. 38). 
 
 *M. Reimann, Die Sprache der mittelkentischen Evangelien (Berlin, 1888, p. 52). 
 
 3 O. Danker, Die Laut- und Flexionslehre der mittelkentischen Denkmaler (Strass- 
 burg, 1879, p. 42). 
 
 4 Danker, p. 42 ; M. Konrath, c Zur Laut- und Flexionslehre des Mittelken- 
 tischen' (Herrig's Archiv, LXXXVIII, 164-167). 
 
 5 Danker, p. 42; Konrath, pp. 164-167). 
 
B.-THE INFLECTION OP THE PRESENT PLURAL 
 INDICATIVE IN THE MIDLAND. 
 
 Turning now to the Early Mercian, we find in the Vespasian 
 Psalter l one form -(a)$ for the present indicative plural. This 
 form is used with any subject, whether noun, personal or relative 
 pronoun, or pronominal adjective : alle fteofte fteowiaft him, 72, 11 ; 
 ge slepaft, 67, 4 ; alle %a gehyhtaft, 5, 12 ; monge arisaft, 3, 2. It 
 is also used if the subject follows the verb : ne ftorhwuniaft >a 
 unrehtwisan, 5, 6 ; lufiaft ge, 4, 3 ; onfoft ge, 67, 17 ; ondredaft 
 alle, 65, 9. 
 
 But in cases of pronominal postposition, there is in the Vespasian 
 Psalter no choice of forms for the present indicative plural such as 
 the Early West-Saxon presents. The ending -()<$ is used whether 
 the personal pronoun precedes or follows, and whether the sentence 
 expresses negation or not. 
 
 The same regularity is found in the use of -en for the present 
 optative plural. Throughout the Psalter there are only two 
 instances of the reduction of -en to -e, both of which are in the same 
 adhortative construction : wynsumie we, 94, 1 and 94, 2. 
 
 The other chief text for the Early Mercian, The Rushworth Gloss 
 to the Gospel of St. Matthew, 2 is not so conservative in its use of 
 forms in the present indicative plural as is the Vespasian Psalter. 
 It is true the p-forms are used, with only a few exceptions in -n, 3 
 but the connecting vowel varies from a to e (-op, -cep, -ep), 4 a 
 phenomenon that is characteristic of the Old Northern texts. 
 These forms in -p are used with any subject in the plural, regard- 
 
 1 E. Zeuner, Die Sprache des kentischen Psalters, Vespasian A. 1 (Halle, 1881, 
 p. 96). 
 
 2 E. M. Brown, The Language of the Rushworth Gloss to the Gospel of Matthew 
 and the Mercian Dialect (Gottingen, 1892, n, 40). 
 
 3 Commenting on the occurrence of the n-forms, Brown says : ' These seem to 
 be early examples of the "extension" of -en to the present indicative plural,, 
 which afterwards became " the characteristic feature of the Midland verb." ' 
 
 4 The form -ip also occurs in the plural : "Sa "Se hie hyngrip, v, 6. 
 
 13 
 
14 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 less of its position : we habbap, m, 8 ; $a %e eow lufigap, v, 46 ; 
 ne gap ge, v, 20 ; lifgap menu, IV, 4; geforletep, vi, 14. 
 
 A chief point of difference between R f and the Vespasian Psalter 
 is the use of the curtailed form in the indicative. According to 
 Sievers, 1 there is one instance of this kind in R r : sitte git, xx, 23. 
 But it is probable that ftonne ge bidde eow, vi, 5, corresponding to 
 mi$ %y gie gebiddas of the Lindisfarne Matthew and to cum oratis 
 of the Latin text, represents a curtailed form in the indicative, the 
 ending having been influenced by the following pronoun eow. 
 Compare also in the same context %us ge ftonne eow gebiddap, vi, 9, 
 where the form is certainly indicative. 
 
 In the loss of -n in the present optative plural, R f resembles the 
 Cura Pastoralis and stands in sharp contrast with the Vespasian 
 Psalter. R f uses the form in -e twenty-three times, whereas in the 
 Psalter the -n is dropped only twice. 
 
 But a marked disagreement with the Cura Pastoralis is the 
 constant use 2 of the regular imperative form in -p, instead of the 
 optatival -e(n), in negative constructions : ne dop ge, xxni, 3 ; ne 
 wenap ge, V, 17 ; ne beopge, VI, 16 ; ne sellap ge, VII, 6 ; ne dcemep 
 ge y vii, 1. As has been shown, the Cura Pastoralis has the cur- 
 tailed form not only in negative clauses : ne wene ge, 353, 21 ; ne 
 beo ge, 325, 8 ; but also in imperatives without negation : beo ge, 
 189, 22; gebindege, 345, 17. 
 
 This refusal on the part of R' to use the curtailed ending in the 
 imperative plural should be brought into connection with the 
 invariable use of -(&)$ in the second plural imperative in the Psal- 
 ter. 3 In view of the tendency in the Midland to generalize the 
 ending -en, this preservation of the old imperative plural in -p is 
 all the more striking. This is, in reality, the beginning of the 
 obdurate resistance made by the form in -eth to the encroachment 
 of that in -en. The ^?-plural here intrenches itself in the impera- 
 tive, not to be driven out until the loss of inflectional -n had 
 leveled the plural of the optative and the indicative with the 
 imperative singular. 
 
 1 Angelsdcksische Grammatik* 360, note 5. 
 
 2 Brown (p. 45) gives three curtailed forms against one hundred and thirty- 
 five in -p. 
 
 3 Zeuner, p. 97. 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 15 
 
 A marked contrast is presented by the Midland to the conserva- 
 tism of the South in preserving the ^-forms in the indicative 
 plural present. In the Midland of the late Old English period, 
 -p had gradually retreated before -n until the latter became the 
 normal sign of the plural indicative. As early as the third part 
 of the Peterborough Chronicle 1 (A. D. 1132-1154), the form in -p 
 had become extremely rare. In Orrm 2 it is relegated to impera- 
 tives when the subject-pronoun precedes the verb or is unexpressed, 
 and -e(n) is also the regular inflection of the indicative in the Debate 
 of the Body and the Soul* dating from the second half of the 
 thirteenth century, the Lay of Havelock* about 1300, Robert 
 Manny ng of Brunne 5 about 1330, and the language of the Nor- 
 folk Guilds 6 of 1389. 
 
 In the extreme southeast, Kentish influence on the Essex homilies 
 of the thirteenth century caused -eft to vary with -en ; 7 but in the 
 Story of Genesis and Exodus of the early thirteenth century only 
 -en is used in the plural indicative. 8 
 
 The form in -en which appears first in the Northeast Midland 
 soon became the characteristic inflection of the whole Mercian 
 territory. In the West-Midland Prose Psalter of the earlier part 
 of the fourteenth century, 9 the ^-plurals are restricted almost 
 exclusively to imperatives. A study of the inflection of the present 
 
 1 H. Meyer, Zur Sprache der jungeren Teile der Chronik von Peterborough (Jena, 
 1889, p. 80). 
 
 8 R. Sachse, Das unorganische E im Orrm zugleich eine Untersuehung uber die 
 Fiexionsweise Orrms (Halle, 1881, p. 49). 
 
 8 G. Heesch, Uber Sprache und Versbau des halbsdchs. Gedichts, Debate of the 
 Body and the Soul (Kiel diss., 1884, p. 65). 
 
 * P. Wohlfeil, The Lay of Havelok the Dane. Ein Beitrag ZUT mitteleng. Sprach- 
 und Litteraturgeschichte (Leipzig, 1890, pp. 56-57) ; F. Schmidt, Zmr Heimatbestim- 
 mung des Havelok (Gottingen, 1900, p. 76). 
 
 6 A. W. Zetsche, Uber den I. Teil der Bearbeitung des Roman de Brut des Wace 
 durch Robert Mannyng of Brunne (Keudnitz-Leipzig, 1887, p. 47). 
 
 6 E. Schultz, Die Sprache der englischen Gilds aus dem Jahre 1389 (Hildesheim, 
 1891, p. 37). 
 
 7 A. Kriiger, Sprache und Dialekt der mittelengl. Homilien in der Handschrift B. 
 14. 52, Trinity Coll., Cambridge (Erlangen, 1885, p. 39). 
 
 8 Hilmer, Ueber die Sprache der altengl. Story of Genesis and Exodus (Sonders- 
 hausen program, 1876, p. 30). 
 
 9 Bulbring, The Earliest Complete English Prose Psalter, E. E. T. 8., 97, p. vi. 
 
16 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 indicative and the imperative in the first thirty-five Psalms has 
 yielded the following results. 
 
 The plural in -(e)n is invariably used in the indicative when the 
 subject is a noun, an adjective, or a relative pronoun : princes 
 acorden, II, 2 ; mani arisen, in, 1 ; hij pat afien, II, 13. Not 
 including the substantive verb ben which is used alike as the plural 
 of the indicative and of the subjunctive, there are thirty-eight 
 plural indicatives with a relative pronoun-subject. These have 
 without exception the ending -(e)n. The distance of the verb from 
 its subject does not affect its inflection : pe welles of wickedness han y 
 xvn, 5. Two nouns in the singular used conjointly as subject 
 may require the -n form : my fader and my moder han, xxvi, 16. 
 
 With a personal pronoun-subject, the inflection is usually -e : ge 
 saie (dicitis), IV, 5 ; we have, xix, 10 ; loue ge, iv, 3 ; hou saie ge, 
 x, 1. The ending -en, however, is used once : in wich hij penchen, 
 IX, 23, where the Dublin MS. has pat pey thenche in. There are 
 only two instances of -ep in the indicative plural : whi doutep hij, 
 n, 1, for which the Dublin MS. has doutyd, the Vulgate original 
 being fremuerunt ; and whereto loue ge ydelnes and sechep lesyng f 
 
 IV, 3. 
 
 As a rule the modals, including willan, are uninflected in the 
 plural. An exception is seen in xxxiv, 31 where hij pat wyl and 
 hij pat willen occur in the same verse. 
 
 The optative plural usually assumes the inflection -en : fallen hij, 
 
 V, 12 ; ne gladen hij, xxxiy, 22, but the -n is sometimes curtailed, 
 as breJce we, u, 3 ; pat hij ne speke, xxxni, 13. In rare instances 
 the full inflection -en has been dropped : cast we, n, 3 ; Wax alle 
 myn enemy s asshamed, vi, 10. 
 
 The imperative plural has the ending -ep both when uncon- 
 ditioned : under stondep, n, 10 ; Louep, xxx, 30, and when the 
 subject pronoun stands in direct contact with the verb : heriep ge, 
 xxn, 23 ; bep ge, xxm, 7 : wittep ge nougt (uolite), xxxi, 1 1 . 
 There is one plural in -es, wrappes, iv, 5, and one in -e, take, 11, 12. 
 
 In the later Middle English period the dominant inflections of 
 the unconditioned indicative and imperative plural are -e(n) and 
 -eth respectively. In the Southern part of the Midland -eth is also 
 frequently found in the indicative. The ending -es, which varies 
 strongly with -en in the Northwest, occurs also more frequently 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 17 
 
 than -eth in the imperative plural of Havelock. 1 It is often used 
 in both the indicative and the imperative plural by Robert of 
 Brunne, in whose works, as well as in Havelock, uninflected forms 
 occasionally occur in the indicative. 
 
 During this later period there is scarcely a Midland text that 
 shows the unvaried use of -e(n) in the indicative plural. Ten Brink 
 records Chaucer's use of ^-plurals only in the case of haveth and 
 perhaps gooth? but the study of Kittredge shows that plurals in 
 -th occur in the four chief manuscripts of the Troilusf Campsall, 
 Harleian 2280, Cambridge Gg. 4. 27, and Harleian 3943. Plurals 
 in -es occur in only the first two of these and may be confidently 
 attributed to the scribes. Manly 's study of the Legend of Good 
 Women f based on MS. Cambridge Gg. 4. 27, gives plurals in -th 
 but none in -es. Likewise H. C. Ford finds in the House of Fame 5 
 three or possibly four occurrences of the /i-plural but none of -es. 
 
 In Piers the Plowman, according to E. Bernard, 6 -e$ and -en 
 are used ' indiscriminately ' in the indicative plural. Wyclif 7 uses 
 -(e)n with occasional -th. In the London archives and the 
 state and parliament papers of the later fourteenth and the earlier 
 fifteenth century, the regular inflection is -e(n) with occasional -th. 8 
 In the fifteenth century -eth occurs beside the more frequent -e(n) 
 
 1 Wohlfeil (p. 57) denies that -es occurs in the plural indicative in Havelock. 
 
 2 The Language and Metre of Chaucer. Second edition, revised by F. Kluge 
 and translated by M. B. Smith (London, 1901, 187 and 197). In both the 
 first and the second edition of Ten Brink's grammar and also in the English 
 translation, goon is given as the plural of the present indicative and gooth as that 
 of the present subjunctive. This, of course, is a mistake. 
 
 3 ' Observations on the Language of Chaucer's Troilus' (Chaucer Society's 
 Publications, Second Ser., 28, %% 97 and 124). 
 
 4 ' Observations on the Language of the Legend of Good Women ' ( Harvard 
 Studies and Notes in Philology and Literature, n, | 97 and 98). 
 
 5 Observations on the Language of Chaucer's House of Fame (Roanoke, 1899, g 
 97 and 98). 
 
 6 William Langland: A grammatical Treatise (Bonn, 1874, p. 77); also E. Kron, 
 William Langley's Such von Peter dem Pfiluger (Erlangen, 1885, p. 59). 
 
 7 H. Fischer, Ueber die Sprache John Wyclif 's, Laut- und Flexionslehre (Halle, 
 1880, p. 61); E. Gasner, Beitrage zum Enlwickelungsgang der neuengl. Schrift- 
 sprache auf Grund der mittelengl. jBibelversionen me sie auf Wyclif und Purvey 
 zurilckgehen sollen (Niirnberg, 1891, p. 27). 
 
 8 Morsbach, Ueber den Ursprung der, neuengl. Schriftsprache (Heilbronn, 1888, 
 p. 134 and pp. 136 -137). 
 
18 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 in Palladius, 1 in Pecock, 2 and in the Coventry Plays and archives. 3 
 In Caxton the predominant inflection is -e(n), but -eth also occurs. 4 
 He reveals a tendency to use -e with a pronominal, but -en with a 
 substantival subject a tendency that finds a parallel not only in 
 the use of the Northern -e and -es, as Rdmstedt suggests, 5 but also 
 in the use of -e and -en in the West-Midland Prose Psalter men- 
 tioned above. 
 
 In the sixteenth century, 6 ^-endings are still frequent in the 
 Midland, and occur in the early part of the seventeenth century in 
 the language of Shakespeare 7 and his contemporaries. 8 
 
 The Midland inflection -en of the present indicative plural is due 
 to a transference to the indicative of a form that originally belonged 
 to the optative. 9 We have seen that in classic West-Saxon this 
 borrowed optative form was restricted in the indicative to verbs 
 with a postpositive pronoun of the first or second persons, in 
 which case the ending -en was curtailed to -e. We shall see in 
 the next chapter that this curtailed form was used in Early 
 
 1 C. Struever, Die mittelengl. Uebersetzung des Palladius (Halle, 1887, p. 81). 
 
 2 A. Hoffmann, Laut- und Formenlehre in Reginald Pecock's Represser (Greifs- 
 wald, 1900, p. 61). 
 
 3 M. Kramer, Sprache und Heimat der sogen. Ludus Coventrice (Halle, 1892, 
 pp. 54-5). 
 
 4 H. Komstedt, Die englische Schriftsprache bei Caxton (Gottingen, 1891, p. 46). 
 5 K6mstedt says: ' Auffallend an den Gebrauch des nordlichen -e und -es erin- 
 
 nert es, dass blosses -e beim Pronomen, -en beim Substantiv beliebter scheint.' 
 
 "Matzner, 3 I, 361: Brandl, 'Quellen des weltlichen Dramas in England vor 
 Shakespeare' (Quellen und Forschungen, LXXX, p. Izxxii). 
 
 T Abbott, A Shakespearian Grammar (London and New York, 1888, pp. 234- 
 237) ; Franz, Shakespeare- Orammatik (Halle, 1900, p. 3 and p. 20). 
 
 8 K. Pollert, Die 3. Person Pluralis auf -s bei Shakespeare (Marburg, 1881, pp. 
 58-59) ; Lounsbury, History of the English Language (New York, 1894, p. 414). 
 
 9 T. Miiller, Angelsdchsische Grammatik (Gottingen, 1883, p. 226); Sweet, A 
 New English Grammar (Oxford, 1892, 1230). 
 
 A similar encroachment of the inflection of the optative plural on that of the 
 indicative plural is found in Middle Low German. From 1350 to 1450 -et and 
 -en are used interchangeably in the indicative, but in the second half of the 
 fifteenth century the -en forms are almost exclusively used. H. Tiimpel, ' Die 
 Mundarten des alten niedersachsischen Gebietes zwischen 1300 und 1500 nach 
 den Urkunden dargestellt' (Beitrage, vii, 90). 
 
 At the present day in the dialects west of the Elbe, -et is the regular inflection 
 of the first and third plural indicative ; whereas in the dialects to the east of that 
 river, -en is used in these persons. O. Behaghel, Paul's Grundri8s t 8 I, 664. 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 19 
 
 Northumbrian not only with postpositive pronouns of all three 
 persons but also in cases of pronominal pre-position. The Mid- 
 land does not go to this extreme but mediates between the 
 conservatism of the South and the syntactic freedom of inflection 
 characteristic of the North. As has been pointed out, the West- 
 Midland Prose Psalter, in harmony with the Northern usage, 
 adopts the curtailed form of the verb whether the personal 
 pronominal subject precedes or follows. But in Orrm the cur- 
 tailed form in the present indicative is restricted to pronominal 
 postposition : we don, 425 ; gitt nilenn, 6220, but bidde we, 5356 ; 
 follghe gitt, 6208. Although in the present indicative, the curtail- 
 ment is further restricted to the first and second persons as in 
 West-Saxon, in the preterit, forms like haffde pegg, 551 may 
 occur beside haffdenn pegg, 1066; gcefe pegg, 19757 beside gcefenn 
 pegg, 19747. With postpositive we and ge of the present and 
 preterit indicative, the adhortative optative, and the imperative, 
 -en is not used : beo ge, 3348 ; wite ge, 3357 ; ga we, 3390 ; loke 
 we, 3392 ; ne wisste ge, 8951 ; ne do ge, 9306 ; mughe we, 9323 ; 
 mihhte we, 11479. Although the curtailed endings are usual with 
 a postpositive pronoun in the Genesis and Exodus, sule ge, 2188, 
 2303; hauege, 2315; have we, 3314, 3542, the full form may 
 also be used, sulen ge, 2354 ; but this is exceptional. Here also 
 the curtailed form may be extended to the third person, but more 
 freely than in Orrm : wulde he, 3766 ; pe . . . sule, 305 (compare 
 3770). However, in the majority of third persons the full form 
 occurs: delen he, 151; sulen he, 1087; he witen, 74; he hauen, 3555. 
 This varying usage in the earlier texts of the Middle English 
 period indicates the progress of the optatival -e(n) in establishing 
 itself in the indicative. The influence of the postpositive we and 
 ge favored the form -e ; but these were greatly in the minority 
 compared with the prepositive pronouns and the third-personal 
 nouns and relatives. Thus -en became established as the norm, 
 with -e as a possible variation under definite conditions. The 
 force of pronominal postposition is seen in the use of the curtailed 
 form not only in the indicative plural and the imperative but also 
 in the preteritive presents, the preterit indicative, and, where 
 leveling with the singular has not already taken place, in the 
 present and preterit subjunctive as well. 
 
20 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 In view of this demonstrable development of the Midland -en 
 from its origin in the adhortative optative, it is obviously inac- 
 curate to assert that the -en was carried over into the indicative in 
 order to distinguish between the plural and the third singular, 
 both of which would otherwise have ended in -eth. 1 
 
 As we have seen above, already in the Rushwortli Gloss to St. 
 Matthew the -en of the optative plural was frequently curtailed to 
 -e. The culmination of this process is seen in the Orrmulum 2 
 where the optative plural is completely leveled with the singular, 
 as was the case in Early Northumbrian. But in the third part of 
 the Peterborough Chronicle 3 and especially in The Story of Genesis 
 and Exodus, 4 the full form in -en is frequently used. 
 
 The -en of the unconditioned indicative plural present is more 
 successful than that of the optative in resisting the tendency 
 towards curtailment, and in many Midland texts the preservation 
 of the -n is the distinguishing mark between the two moods. 5 
 The e-form in the indicative plural had, however, come down from 
 the Early Mercian by lineal descent in cases of pronominal post- 
 position in the first and second persons, and was gradually strength- 
 ened by the analogy of the numerous curtailed optatives and by the 
 tendency in the language itself to drop final -n in unaccented sylla- 
 bles. This tendency was very active in the time of Chaucer, 6 and 
 continued to operate through the whole later Middle English period. 7 
 
 Important testimony on the date of the passing of -en is fur- 
 nished by Ben Jonson, who asserts that the present indicative 
 plural in -en was used until about the reign of Henry VIII 
 (1509-1547), and complains that the form of the plural had in his 
 own day become identical with that of the first person singular. 8 
 
 1 O. F. Emerson, The History of the English Language (New York, 1897, p. 
 375); M. Kaluza, Historische Grammatik der englischen Sprache (Berlin, 1901, \ 326). 
 
 2 Cf. Sachse, p. 50. , 3 Meyer, p. 80. 4 Hilmer, p. 30. 
 5 Zetsche, p. 47; Bernard, p. 77; Hoffman, p. 61. 
 
 6 Cf. Ten Brink, \\ 117, 186, 188, 190, 193, 194, 196, 261, etc.; Morsbach, 
 Neuengl. Schriftsprache, p. 159. 
 
 7 The loss of the resultant final -e can not be considered apart from the study 
 of metrics and will not therefore be discussed here. 
 
 8 Jonson says in his English Grammar (ed. W. Gifford, The Works of Ben 
 Jonson, London, 1816, vol. ix, p. 305) : ' But now, whatsoever is the cause, it hath 
 quite grown out of use, and that other so generally prevailed, that I dare not 
 presume to set this afoot again ; albeit, to tell you my opinion, I am persuaded 
 that the lack hereof, well considered, will be found a great blemish to our tongue.' 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 21 
 
 A revival of -en is seen in the poetry of Spenser 1 and his imitators, 2 
 but it had long passed altogether from the popular speech. 
 
 With the passage of inflectional -en from the Middle English 
 verb, the feeling for its proper use became dulled. Writers who 
 have attempted to use the archaic language of the Midland have 
 frequently been led into absurd mistakes by neglecting to recognize 
 the grammatical value of this -en. Some remarkable blunders of 
 this kind occur in the Court of Love : B Wheder that she me 
 helden lefe or loth, 847 ; I kepen in no wyse, 684 ; For if by me 
 this mater springen out, 725 ; thay kepten been, 526, in which 
 kepten is a past participle. 
 
 Nor have editors of Middle English texts been wholly free from 
 this fault. Urry betrays his ignorance of the value of the Mid- 
 land -en by giving such forms as these in his edition of Chaucer : 4 
 4 And rage he couth as it werin a whelpe ; ' ' Of studie tookin he 
 most cure and hede ; ? ( This duke of whome I makin rnencion.' 5 
 
 The Midland, by virtue of its geographical position, possessed, 
 in addition to -en and -eth, a plural inflection -es that has been 
 explained as due either to the borrowing of the Northern plural -es 6 
 or to the preponderating influence of the Midland third singular. 7 
 
 1 G. Wagner, On Spenser's Use of Archaisms (Halle, 1879, p. 45). 
 
 2 Lourisbury, The English Language, p. 412. 
 
 8 Ed. Skeat, Chaucerian and Other Pieces (being a supplement to the Complete 
 Works of Geoffrey Chaucer), Oxford, 1897, p. 409. See also Skeat's account of the 
 misuse of -en, p. Ixxvii, on which the paragraph above is based. 
 
 * J. Urry, Chaucer's Works, London, 1871. 
 
 5 Cf. Lounsbury, Studies in Chaucer (New York, 1892, I, p. 287). 
 
 6 Matzner, I, 362 ; Franz, pp. 403-4 ; Lounsbury, History of the English Language, 
 p. 413. 
 
 T Cf. Pollert, Die 3. Person Pluralis auf -s bei Shakespeare, p. 59 ;. Brandl, I. c. 
 p. Ixxxii. 
 
 Prof. C. Alphonso Smith (' Shakespeare's Present Indicative s- Endings with 
 Plural Subjects,' Publications of the Modern Language Association, xi, 363-376, 
 followed by 'The Chief Difference between the First and Second Folios of 
 Shakespeare,' Englische Studien, xxx, 1-20) maintains ' that in is, was, -s and -th t 
 used with plural subjects, we have not instances of borrowing, but evidence rather 
 of a tendency on the part of the third indicative singular, unchecked by the formal 
 laws of a grammar-making age, to establish itself as the norm, and thus to usurp 
 the place held by the indicative plural.' Storm (Englische Philologie, 9 1, 807) gives 
 a similar explanation : ' Shakespeare, der geborene Mittellander, scheint von der 
 in der siidenglischen Volkssprache herrschenden Verwirrung bisweilen beriihrt 
 zu sein, und teils aus Unachtsamkeit, teils um die Volkssprache nachzuahmen, 
 teils dem Keim zu Liebe den Singular fiir den Plural zu gebrauchen.' 
 
22 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 Although the usage of a singular verb with a plural subject 
 was common in the North (as will be shown in the next chapter) 
 and was doubtless of frequent occurrence in the Midland and the 
 South as well, 1 yet the leveling of singular and plural forms was 
 never as general in the Midland as in the North. The fact that 
 the use of the s-plural in the Midland is largely restricted to the 
 speech of the uneducated seems to point to the carrying over of 
 the -s of the third singular into the plural, a process aided by the 
 old usage of a singular predicate with a compound subject. But 
 this -s of the singular is not indigenous to the Midland and, like 
 that of the plural, is to be explained as an invasion of the Midland 
 by the inflections of the North. 
 
 1 In the Northern and the Southern of the Middle English period the plural 
 and the third singular fell together except in the case of is and was, thus render- 
 ing all discussion of this point for these dialects largely speculative. 
 
 A striking parallel to this invasion of the plural by the singular inflection is 
 presented by the modern Scandinavian. In regard to this, J. A. Lundell (Paul's 
 Grundrissf 1, 1488) says : * Im Verb ist (ausser Far.-Isl.) der Konj. im Schwinden 
 im Ostschwed. gibt es davon keine Spur mehr, ebenso besondere Pluralform 
 im Indik. : in finland., schwed. (etwa Halland und das siidlichste Westergotland 
 ausgenommen) und danischen Mundarten (ein paar schleswigsche Kirchspiele 
 ausgenommen) wird die Sing. -Form immer, in Norwegen gewo'hnlich auch bei 
 pluralem Subjekt verwandt.' 
 
C.-THE INFLECTION OF THE PRESENT PLURAL 
 INDICATIVE IN THE NORTH. 
 
 I. THE LEADING EXPLANATIONS OF THE 
 NORTHERN INFLECTIONS. 
 
 Retracing our steps, we find in JBouterwek's Die Vier Evangelien 
 in Altnordhumbrischer Sprache (Giitersloh, 1857, p. cliv), the occur- 
 rence of vocalic endings in the North explained in the following 
 manner : 
 
 In the Anglo-Saxon conjugation the ending -on, -en occurs in the 
 plural of the preterit indicative and of the present and preterit sub- 
 junctive. In these forms the -n is very often lost in Northumbrian, in 
 consequence of which the plural of the preterit subjunctive has the 
 same form as the singular. The plural present indicative of wosa, 
 esse also shares in this process, particularly in the second person when 
 the personal pronoun ge follows and is enclitically attached to the 
 verb : ue ne aru ue, nos non sumus, John vm, 41 ; aro ge or gie 
 instead of aron ge or gie, estis ; also once bifto, sunt, Mark in, 28. 
 
 In a similar vein is the language of Sievers (Angelsdchsische 
 Grammatik, Halle, 1882, 360, note) : 
 
 Originally this apocope was restricted to final -n, that is, it affected 
 only the adhortative forms of the present (-an and optatival -en, the 
 latter especially frequent with negative imperatives) and the whole 
 preterit; in Northumbrian and the Psalter, -e for -$ is therefore 
 wholly wanting ; in West-Saxon, on the contrary, the curtailment has 
 been carried over also into the indicative and the real imperative. 
 
 In the second edition (1886) of Sievers's grammar, this is 
 repeated without alteration, but in the third edition (1898) a 
 marked change has been made. 
 
 Originally the curtailment affected only the verb-forms in -n, that 
 is, the adhortative forms of the present (the real adhortatival -an of 
 the first plural as well as the optatival -en, the latter especially frequent 
 with negative imperatives), the optative and the preterit (including the 
 
 23 
 
24 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 present forms of the preterit! ve presents). From these n-forms the 
 curtailment is then analogically carried over also to the original -aft- 
 forms. In this process the optative especially seems to have served as 
 a pattern for the indicative (compare the West-Saxon hcebbe we, but 
 also forms like the indicative habbon we, imperative nallon ge beside 
 nallaft ge, R 2 ). Only in the South has the carrying over of curtailed 
 forms into the indicative and the imperative proper taken place to 
 a considerable degree : already in the Cura Pastoralis the -e predomi- 
 nates. The Anglian dialects, on the other hand, present numerous 
 short forms for old -en, -an, -un, but still preserve old -aft we, ge, etc., 
 in the main unimpaired ; however, R l has exceptionally an indicative 
 sitte git, R 2 an indicative forstonde we (with which compare the indica- 
 tive habbon we, imperative nallon gie beside the usual nallaft gie) ; each 
 of the Lindisfarne Gospels an indicative, nabbo we, walla we, and walli 
 ge. Curtailed forms occur with somewhat greater frequency in the 
 Ritual, where the Latin original would lead one to expect an indica- 
 tive present. 
 
 Attention had previously been called to the occurrence of vocalic 
 forms in the Ritual by U. Lindelof (Die Sprache des Rituals von 
 Durham, Helsingfors, 1890, p. 78). After recording the fact that 
 the number of ^>-forms in the present indicative plural exceeds 
 that of the s-forms, Lindelof says : 
 
 Besides these formations there are in the Ritual a considerable num- 
 ber of present plurals, which end in a vowel (-a or -e). In West-Saxon, 
 as is well known, there frequently occurs instead of -aft a shorter end- 
 ing -e, if one of the pronouns we or ge immediately follows the verb. 
 According to Sievers, this -e for -aft is not found in the North, this 
 dialect apocopating only forms in original final -n. The Ritual, how- 
 ever, does not confirm this assertion; there are found in it various 
 instances of curtailed forms (ending in -a or -e) which we must prob- 
 ably regard as indicatives ; e. g. bidde ve (precamur), 162,2 ; gifylga 
 ve (prosequimur), 71,10 ; gimersiga ve (celebramus), 48,20 ; habba ve, 
 89,2; 91,3; gifeaia ve (gaudemus), 93,3. Yet it must be granted 
 that the glossator could have perhaps construed a few of these forms 
 as subjunctives. Aside from the cases mentioned, there are still some 
 instances of vocalic endings in the plural that translate Latin present 
 plural indicatives : we bihalda (abstinemus), 17,7 ; ve deadiga (mori- 
 mur), 26,19; we deadia and we lifia, 26,20; etc. Whether these 
 forms are meant to be real subjunctives or whether they are to be 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 25 
 
 regarded merely as analogical formations on the subjunctive, I do not 
 venture to decide. 
 
 A detailed consideration of these vocalic forms in the Ritual is 
 given in the following chapter. 
 
 The few vocalic endings recorded by Miss Elizabeth Mary Lea 
 (' The Language of the Northumbrian Gloss to the Gospel of St. 
 Mark,' Anglia, xvi, p. 140) are chiefly preteritive presents. ' In 
 cases where one of the Pronouns we 1 or g stands immediately 
 after the verb, as a rule the ordinary plural form in -aft, -as is 
 found. ' The forms in -p predominate slightly over those in -s. 
 
 Similar results are obtained by H. Ftichsel (' Die sprache der 
 Northumbrischen interlinearversion zum Johannes- Evangelium,' 
 Anglia, xxiv, 61). 
 
 Both of these monographs corroborate the remark of Sievers 
 (Angelsachsische Grammatik, 3 354, note 2) that in the Northern 
 texts the inflection of the verb has been thrown into great confu- 
 sion, either through the actual process of decomposition in the 
 language itself or through the sheer awkwardness of the glossators 
 in rendering the Latin forms of the original. 
 
 Sievers ( 358, note 2) had asserted concerning the second and 
 third singular indicative : 
 
 In Northumbrian, a and, less frequently in the Lindisfarne Gospels 
 and the Ritual, also ce occur beside the usual e, in consequence of 
 confusion with the endings of the second weak conjugation. Thus 
 there stand side by side forms like the second singular bindes and 
 bindas, -ces (Gospels, bindeft, -aft, -a$$), third singular bindeft, -es and 
 bindaft, -ceft or bindas, -ces. 
 
 But Lindeldf in his new study, Die Sudnorthumbrische Mund- 
 art des 10. Jahrhunderts : Die Sprache der sog. Glosse Rushworth 2 
 (Banner Beitrdge zur Anglistik, x, 129), comments as follows on 
 the occurrence of -cr$ twenty-three times and -as nine times in the 
 third person singular of the present indicative : 
 
 In the occurrence of these endings, I should not like so much to see 
 the influence of the weak verbs of the second class (compare Sievers, 
 358, note 2) as the employment of plural forms in the singular. All 
 the forms in -aft, -as adduced above have a decidedly plural aspect 
 
26 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 (o-umlaut in niomaft, cweoftaft etc., u in cumaft contrasted with the 
 singular cymeft, etc.). In Eu. 2 the indicative plural present and the 
 second plural imperative end in -aft (c. 120) or -as (c. 145). . . . Be- 
 sides these, the ending -eft occurs seventeen times and the ending -es 
 seven times. . . . Here it is certainly not a question of the weakening 
 of the final vowel or of the carrying over of the singular ending, but, 
 as the forms cymeft, cwefteft, etc. demonstrate, it is a case of the use of 
 the singular form in a plural function. Also when the pronouns we, 
 ge immediately follow, Ru? regularly preserves the ending -aft, -as; 
 yetforstonde we occurs once. 
 
 Many attempts have been made to account for the s-forms of 
 the present indicative plural in Old Northumbrian. Bouterwek 
 (p. cxlvi) thinks the interchange of -s and -ft indicates an arbitrary 
 pronunciation of -ft. Murray says : * 
 
 ' The Greek not only expels the n, but, like the Northern English 
 and Scotch, changes the dental into s, <ep-ovon, for <ep-owri, Latin 
 fer-unt, Sanscrit bhar-anti, M. Goth, bair-and, Ags. ber-aft, Old Midi. 
 Eng. ber-en, Old Southern ber-eth, Old Northern ber-es.' 
 
 Sweet says (History of English Sounds, Oxford, 1888, 526): 
 
 1 The change of final p into s in verb-inflections in 1. North., as in 
 bindes, bindas=;WS bint (Angl. bindep), bindap seems to be organic, 
 as there do not seem to be any analogical influences at work/ 
 
 This view appears to have the support of Biilbring (Altenglisches 
 Mementarbuch, 7. Teil: Lautlehre, Heidelberg, 1902, 569): 
 
 Final p of the unaccented endings -ep and ~ap in the third singular 
 and the plural present frequently passes over into s in late Northum- 
 brian : third singular bindeft, bindes, ' binds,' plural bindaft, bindas, 
 imperative plural far aft, faros, 'go.' 
 
 The principles that regulate the use of the different inflections of 
 the present plural indicative in Middle Northern have, in their 
 broad outlines, been clearly stated by Murray (The Dialect of the 
 Southern Counties of Scotland, p. 211 ff.) : 
 
 1 The Dialect of the Southern Counties of Scotland ( Transactions of the Philological 
 Society, 1870-72, p. 212). 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 27 
 
 ' In the present tense, aa leyke, wey leyke, yee leyke, thay leyke, are 
 used only when the verb is accompanied by its proper pronoun ; when 
 the subject is a noun, adjective, interrogative or relative pronoun, or 
 when the verb and subject are separated by a clause, the verb takes 
 the termination -s in all persons. Thus " aa cum fyrst ; yt's mey at 
 cums fyrst ; wey gang theare ; huz tweae quheyles gangs theare ; yt's 
 huz at says seae ; ye sey quhat thay mein ; yuw eanes seys quhat thir 
 meins." ... In the Old North- Anglian, the conjugation was : 
 
 Ih cyme we cyrn-es "} 
 
 $u cym-es gee cym-es V or cyme we, gee, fa 
 
 he cym-es hea or ]?a cym-es ) 
 
 But before the date of the earliest Northern writings of the 13th cen- 
 tury, the form without the -s had been extended to all cases in which 
 the verb was accompanied by its proper pronoun, whether before or 
 after it, leaving the full form in -3 to be used with other nomina- 
 tives only.' 
 
 So nearly definitive was the work of Murray as regards the verb 
 forms in Middle Northern that no fuller explanation of the vary- 
 ing inflections in the indicative present has appeared since the 
 publication of his study. Miss Lucy Toulmin Smith follows 
 Murray in her Introduction to the York Plays (Oxford, 1885, 
 p. Ixxii), citing as variant forms we (ge, pai) syng(e) but we (ge,pai) 
 that synges ; pe briddes synges ; we ga hame and tas reste. 
 
 It may be presumed that Schleich was not acquainted with the 
 work of Murray, when, in his edition of Ywain and Gawain 
 (Oppeln and Leipzig, 1887, p. xviii), he made the following 
 assertions concerning the forms of the indicative present : 
 
 The whole plural is in the main uninflected. In the rimes I have 
 found only one instance each of the second and third person standing 
 without inflection, namely ge Icnaw (: thraw, 2362) and pai dwell 
 (: omell, 1435). . . . Moreover, the ending s, es is frequently found 
 but is never certified by the rime: compare we suffers, 3044; ge 
 thinJces, 1530, 1538 ; pai herkens, 4 ; uses, 36 ; makes, 37, 39 ; greves y 
 508 ; findes, 1656 ; has 1655, etc. 
 
 But the phrase in 1. 3044 is not we suffers as Schleich asserts. 
 Together with the preceding line, it reads : ]>an sal we pas al 
 
28 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 hejnn quite, pat here suffers al this despite; 11. 1530 and 1538 : 
 Whils ge it have and thinkes on me ; 1. 4 : pat herkens Ywayne 
 and Gawayne; 1. 36: men uses; 11. 37 and 39: men makes; 
 1. 508 : His wordes greves me right noght. All the other 
 instances adduced by Schleich are cases in which the subject is 
 either a noun or a relative and in which, consequently, the form 
 without -s would have been as great an irregularity as the form 
 with -s would have been when the personal pronoun immediately 
 precedes the verb. 
 
 In the following monographs no attempt has been made to 
 ascertain more accurately than Murray had done the principles 
 underlying the difference in usage of the Northern inflected and 
 uninflected forms. The authors of many of these studies are con- 
 cerned only secondarily with questions of inflection and should not 
 therefore be expected to advance our knowledge on this point. 
 Some do not appear to be aware of Murray's work and generalize 
 on the endings of the plural without any reference to the nature of 
 the subject of the verb. Others who make a distinction in this 
 respect have evidently overlooked the fact that the inflection of a 
 Northern verb is affected by the distance from its pronominal 
 subject. 
 
 A. Ackermann, Die Spraehe der dltesten sehottischen Urkunden, A. D. 
 1385-1440 (Berlin, 1897). 
 
 M. Adler, Uber die Richard Rolle de Hampole zugesehriebene Para- 
 phrase der sieben Busspsalmen (Altenburg, 1885, p. 9). 
 
 Ida Baumann, Die Spraehe der Urkunden aus Yorkshire im 15. 
 Jahrhundert (Heidelberg, 1902, p. 101). 
 
 F. J. Bierbaum, Uber Lawrence Minot und seine Lieder (Halle, 
 1876, p. 37). 
 
 K. Boddeker, 'Uber die Spraehe der Benediktinerreger (Englisehe 
 Studien, n, 376). 
 
 G. Brade, Uber Huehown's Pistil of Swete Susan (Breslau, 1892, 
 p. 17). 
 
 P. Buss, 'Sind die von Horstmann herausgegebenen sehottischen 
 Legenden ein Werk Barbere's?' (Anglia, ix, 510). 
 
 C. L. Crow, Zur Geschichte des kurzen Reimpaars im Mittelenglischen 
 (Gottingen, 1892, p. 28). 
 
 B. Dannenberg, Metrik und Spraehe der mittelengl. Romanze, The 
 JSege off Melayne (Gottingen, 1890, p. 43). 
 
I I 
 
 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 2& 
 
 A. R. Diebler, Henrisone's Fabeldichtungen (Halle, 1885, p. 31). 
 
 R. Eule, Untersuchungen uber die nordengl. Version des Octavian 
 (Halle dies., 1889). 
 
 G. T. Fiona, Scandinavian Influence on Southern Lowland Scotch 
 (New York, 1900). 
 
 H. Gerken, Die Sprache des Bischofs Douglas von Dunkeld ( Vocalis- 
 mus und Consonantismus der Reimworter) nebst An hang : Zur Echt- 
 heitsfrage des King Hart (Strassburg, 1898). 
 
 J. Gutmann, Untersuchungen uber das mittelengl. Gedicht, The 
 Buke of the Howlat (Halle, 1892, pp. 36-37). 
 
 W. Hagedorn, Uber die Sprache einiger nordlicher Chaucer schuler 
 (Gottingen, 1892). 
 
 J. B. Henneman, Untersuchungen uber das mittelengl. Gedicht, Wars 
 of Alexander (Berlin, 1889). 
 
 F. H. Henschel, Darstellung der Flexionslehre in John Barbour's 
 Bruce (Leipzig, 1886, p. 69). 
 
 A. Herrmann, Untersuchungen uber das schottische Alexanderbuch 
 (Halle, 1893, p. 48). 
 
 O. Herttrich, Studien zu den York Plays (Breslau, 1886). 
 
 R. H. Hudnall, A Presentation of the Grammatical Inflections in 
 Andrew of Wyntouris Orygynale Cronykil of Scotland (Leipzig, 1898, 
 p. 90). 
 
 P. Kamann, Uber Quellen und Sprache der York Plays (Halle, 
 1876, p. 37). 
 
 J. Kaufmann, Traite de la Langue du Poete ecossais William Dun- 
 bar (Bonn, 1873, p. 95). 
 
 G. Knauff, Studien uber Sir David Lyndsay (Berlin, 1885). 
 
 H. Koster, Huchowris Pistel of Swete Susan, Kritische Ausgabe 
 (Strassburg, 1895, I, 59). 
 
 O. Lengert, Die schottische Romanze Roswall and Lillian (Leipzig, 
 1892). 
 
 H. Lessmann, Studien zu dem mittelengl. Life of St. Outhbert (Darm- 
 stadt, 1896). 
 
 H. Lu'bke, The Aunters of Arthur at the Tern-Wathelan (Berlin, 
 1883). 
 
 F. Mennicken, ' Versbau und Sprache in Huchowns Morte Arthure ' 
 (Bonner Beitrdge zur Anglistik, v, 119). 
 
 O. Noltemeier, Uber die Sprache des Gedichts, The Knightly Tale of 
 Golagros and Gawane (Marburg, 1889, p. 52). 
 
 L. Ostermann, ' Untersuchungen zu Ratis Raving und dem Gedicht, 
 The Thewis of Gud Women ' (Bonner Beitrdge zur Anglistik, xn, 61). 
 
30 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 M. L. Perrin, Uber Thomas Castelford's Chronik von England 
 (Boston, 1891, pp. 26-27). 
 
 W. P. Keeves, A Study in the Language of Scottish Prose before 1600 
 (Baltimore, 1893). 
 
 G. Reichel, Studien zu der schottischen Romanze, The History of Sir 
 Eger, Sir Grime, and Sir Gray-Steel (Darmstadt, 1893V 
 
 O. Retzlaff, Untersuchungen uber den nordengl. Legendencyclus der 
 MSS. Harleian 4196 und Cotton. Tib. E VII. (Berlin, 1888, p. 50). 
 
 W. Scholle, Laurence Minot's Lieder (Strassburg, 1884, p. xxiv). 
 
 H. StefFens, 'Versbau und Sprache des mittelengl. stabreimenden 
 Gedichtes, The Wars of Alexander' (JBonner Beitr'dge zur Anglistik, ix). 
 
 M. Tonndorf, Rauf Coilyear, Ein mittelsehottisehes Gedieht (Halle, 
 1893, p. 39). 
 
 [' J. Ullmann, 'Studien zu Richard Rolle de Hampole' (Englische 
 Studien, vn, 427). 
 
 H. Wende, Uberlieferung und Spraehe der mittelengl. Version des 
 Psalters und ihr Verhdltnis zur lateinisehen Vorlage (Breslau, 1884). 
 
 W. Wischmann, Untersuchungen uber das Kingis Quair Jacobs I. 
 von Schottland (Wismar, 1887, pp. 17-20). 
 
 A. Zielke, Untersuchungen zu Sir Eglamour of Artois (Kiel, 1889). 
 
 II. THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE NORTHERN 
 
 INFLECTIONS OF THE PRESENT PLURAL 
 
 INDICATIVE. 
 
 1. The Old Northumbrian. 
 
 From the preceding sections it has been seen that the Durham 
 Ritual presents a more advanced, that is a more nearly modern, 
 stage of inflection than does any other Early Northumbrian text. 
 It is also evident that the choice of present indicative plural end- 
 ings in Middle Northern is determined solely by syntactic condi- 
 tions. Can it be that these conditions were in any degree present 
 in Old Northumbrian ? If so, when and how did they first mani- 
 fest themselves and what was their historical development ? These 
 questions constitute the main subject of study in the present chapter. 
 
 Durham Ritual. 1 
 A. Endings in -$. 2 
 
 1 Ed. Stevenson, Publications of the Surtees Society, London, 1839. 
 1 Throughout this chapter no attempt is made to enumerate all the endings 
 nnless it is so stated. 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 31 
 
 1. Noun-subject: cynningas giseaft, 55,19; softfasto . . . liofaft, 
 92,3; onginnati bloedsungas, 126,1 ; gisdneft softfcesto, 86,17. 
 
 2. Adjective-subject : alle giheraft, 89,2 ; allo . . . iornafi, 5,17 ; 
 gihergaft mengo (multi), 85,7. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : %a %e gibrucaft, 99,2 ; %a %e 
 fylgaK, 113,2 ; $a Ke . . . heriaK, 113,1. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject : we biddaft, 4,13 ; we gitrymmeft, 
 11,12 ; we ongeattaft, 42,18 ; hia onfoeft, 92,9 ; gie . . . giwcepnigaft, 
 21,19. 
 
 5. Subject unexpressed : sceeaft, 5,9 ; giheraft, 48,2 ; settaft, 
 187,17. 
 
 B. Endings in -s. 
 
 1 . Noun-subject : None. 
 
 2. Adjective-subject : None. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : %a %e . . . sittes, 168,6 ; $a >e mec 
 gicehtas, 168 ; 4. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject : we biddas, 2,9 ; gie stondas, 60,1 ; 
 we ondredes >ec and scecas, 125,7; wutas gie, 24,18; of 'Umbras 
 gie, 82,16. 
 
 5. Subject unexpressed : gionwceldas, 86,18 ; f'letas, 93,6 ; doas, 
 176,19. 
 
 C. Vocalic endings. 1 
 
 1. Noun-subject: None. 
 
 2. Adjective-subject : None. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : None. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject. (a) Verb -f pronoun : bidde we 
 (precamur), 162,2 ; gidce we (faciemus), 4,2 ; (agimus), 36,14 ; gifeaia 
 we (gaudemus), 93,3; gifylga we (prosequimur), 71,10; habba we 
 (habemus), 89,2; 91,3; gihreme we (imploramus), 37,2; gimersiga 
 we (celebramus), 48,20; 82,2; giscrinca hia (arrescunt), 125,18. 
 To these may be added aro gie (estis), 27,12 ; 28,12, and naro gie 
 (non estis), 107,3, contrasted with ne aron gie, 82,15. 
 
 (b) Pronoun -f- verb : we agefe (exhibemus), 9,1 ; we bihalda 
 usig (abstinemus), 17,7; hia giclcensigo (castigant), 18,8; we 
 
 1 With the exception of the preteritive presents, all the vocalic forms of the 
 present that gloss Latin indicative plurals are recorded. 
 
32 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 deadi(g}a (morimur), 26,19 and 20; gie gidoe (facitis), 14,1; we 
 giearnia (meremur), 8,18 (Skeat's collation 1 ); 40,19; 41,2; we 
 gifeai(g)a (gaudemus), 54,16 , 75,10 ; wegifeagu, 52,14 ; we gifylga 
 (exequimur), 34,7 ; we lifia (vivimus), 26,20 ; we lifiga (vivemus), 
 26,15; we (gi)mersia (celebramus), 9,16; 69,12; 75,4; 89,8 and 
 16 ; eft we niwaia (recensemus), 87,5 ; we onfoe (suscipimus), 87,6 ; 
 we gisomniga (congregamur), 172,4; we giftoncia (gratulamur), 
 74,4 ; we wor%i(g)a (veneramur), 64,2 and 9 ; 67,4 ; 74,17 ; 89,13 ; 
 (adoramus), 71,16 (Skeat's collation). 
 
 Vocalic endings occur twice when the subject-pronoun is not 
 expressed : gigladiga (letamur), 49,9 audgimersia (celebramus), 84,2. 
 
 We have, then, in the Durham Ritual forty-six vocalic forms 
 that translate plural indicatives of the Latin text. That the 
 translator correctly construed the sense of the original is proved 
 by the fact that these verbs are properly translated when they 
 occur elsewhere in the text. For example, non habemus pontifi- 
 cem, 91,3 is glossed by ne habba we heh bisc,' whereas in the 
 preceding verse habemus pontificem is rendered by we habbaft heh 
 bisc' To maintain that the glossator understood the Latin in the 
 one case but not in the other would be absurd. It is true that 
 only a few cases are as plain as this, but it may be confidently held 
 nevertheless that the majority of these vocalic forms are indica- 
 tives. 2 
 
 That these curtailed forms were carried over into the indicative 
 from the optative with the consequent dropping not of -p but of 
 -n, has been shown in the treatment of the West-Saxon. The 
 influence of the preteritive presents and of willan, itself originally 
 an optative, in producing this result has also been considered. 
 With these must be associated in the Northern the plural aron 
 which readily lent itself to curtailment. 
 
 The categories given above show that the curtailed form is used 
 not only when the pronominal subject is postpositive but when it 
 is prepositive as well. No parallel for such an advanced stage of 
 inflection is found in the Early Midland or in the Early or Middle 
 
 1 The Philological Society's Transactions, 1879, Appendix II. 
 
 2 Lindelof (Die Sprache des Rituals von Durham, p. 78) concludes his discussion 
 by saying, ' Ob diese Formen wirkliche Conjunctive sein sollen, oder ob sie nur 
 als Analogiebildungen nach dem Conjunctiv anzusehen sind, wage ich nicht 
 zu entscheiden.' 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 33 
 
 Southern. A similar procedure in Anglo-Saxon is found only in 
 the Lindisfarne Gospels of Bernicia, but they are in this respect 
 much more conservative than the Ritual. 
 
 Lindisfarne Gospels. 1 Matthew. 
 
 A. Endings in -$. 
 
 1. Noun-subject: witgo arisaft, xxiv, 11; wceras getele, xii, 
 41 ; fteqfas . . . forstelaft, VI, 20. 
 
 2. Adjective-subject: alle nioma&, xix, 11; alle . . . habbaft, 
 xxi, 26 ; monig . . . cymmeft, Xxiv, 5. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : %a %e hyncgra, v, 6 ; %a . . . 
 cy%a%, xxvn, 62. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject : hiagesea^, xm, 16 ; we getrewaft, 
 xxvin, 14 ; wallah gie, xx, 32. 
 
 5. Subject unexpressed : lufaft, xxni, 6. 
 
 B. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject: legeras gewyrcas, vi, 2; hwcelpas brucas, xv, 
 27; duro forestondes, xvi, 18; oweftas menn, xvi, 13; cymes . . . 
 dagas, ix, 15. 
 
 2. Adjective-subject: monige . . . cymas and gehrestas, vm, 11. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : $a widlas, xv, 20 ; %a $e falles, 
 xv, 27 ; %a$e . . . utgaas, XV, 18. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject : hia gesellas, x, 17 ; we bidas, xr, 
 3; gie geheras, xm, 14; we stiges, XX, 18; heras hia, xni, 13; 
 nabbas we, xiv, 17 ; stondes ge, xx, 6. 
 
 5. Subject unexpressed : wcexas ne Wynnes, vi, 27. 
 
 C. Vocalic endings. 
 
 Numerous curtailed forms occur in the preteritive presents, where 
 -n, and not -$, has been dropped, The curtailed ending is also 
 carried over by analogy to walla we (< wallan we) vi, 31 ; gie 
 welle (vultis ; R l , ge willaft), VII, 12 ; gie wellce (vultis), xi, 14 ; 
 monig wcelle g[e~\cweada (multi dicent; R l , monige cwepaft), vil, 
 22. Other vocalic forms glossing Latin indicatives are we gedrince 
 (bibemns ; R l , drincap wee), vi, 31 ; ne oncneu ge (non intelligitis ; 
 .B 1 , ne ongetaft ge\ xvi, 11 ; and gie geheras and ne oncnceuge 
 
 1 Ed. Skeat, Cambridge, 1871-1887. 
 3 
 
34 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 (audietis et non intelligitis), xin, 14, contrasted with ne oncnauas 
 hia (neque intelligunt) in the same context. 
 
 The intervention of two substantives between the verb and its 
 subject causes the inflection -s to be extended to the first singular 
 in ec ic monn amm under mceht hcefis, vin, 9. 
 
 Mark. 
 
 A. Endings in -$. 
 
 1. Noun-subject: bytto losaft, II, 22; habbaft halo, n, 17; 
 cymeft ftonne dagas, n, 20. 
 
 2. Adjective-subject : alle scecaft, I, 37 ; alle onginnaft, xm, 4. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject ; %a %e heraft, TV, 20 ; %a %e . . . 
 nabbaft, II, 17 ; x, 23 ; %a %e , . .forecymeft, vii, 15. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject: hia fcestaft, n, 18; gie doefo, vii, 
 9 ; doaft gie, n, 24 ; habbaft gie, vi, 38. 
 
 5. Subject unexpressed : cmeftaft, I, 30; cumaS, in, 19. 
 
 B. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject : ftegnas ftine ne geongas, vii, 5 ; cwcefoas . . . 
 menu, vin, 27 ; cwceftas %a wuftuuto, xn, 35. 
 
 2. Adjective or demonstrative pronoun-subject : %a (ilia) gewidle- 
 gas, vii, 20 ; monigo . . . cymces, xin, 6. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : "Safte gewidlas, vii, 15 ; -Sa ^e 
 cwceftas, xir, 18 ; $a ^e inn-gaas, xii, 23. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject : Am fcestas, II, 20 ; (/ie haldas, 
 Vii, 8 ; ^ie wutedlice cwoeftas, vii, 1 1 ; forgefes gie, vii, 1 2 ; habbas 
 hia, vin, 2. 
 
 5. Subject unexpressed : selles, x, 33. 
 
 C. Vocalic endings. 
 
 Exclusive of the preteritive presents and wesan, the following 
 vocalic forms translate Latin plural indicatives : wallige (vultis ; 
 R 2 , wallasge), xv, 12 ; we gelic-leta welle (adsimilabimus), iv, 30 ; 
 gie onfce (accipietis), xi, 24 ; and unbinde hia (solvunt), xi, 4. 
 
 Luke. 
 A. Endings in -$. 
 
 1. Noun-subject : deado arisaft, vii, 22 ; staras cymeft, xii, 6 ; 
 wceras . . . arisaft, xi, 32 ; cymaft dagas, xxi, 6 ; xxm, 29 ; 
 cymeS dagas } XVH, 22 ; xix, 43. 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 35 
 
 2. Adjective-subject : alle . . . onginnaS, xiv, 29 ; boege . . . 
 fallaft, vi, 59 ; gaa$ alle, 11, 3. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject: %a %e geheraft, vin, 12; $a $e 
 geseaft, x, 20; 3a $e . . . /ceSaS, vi, 27; $a $e iuh wel doeft, 
 vi, 33. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject : we habbaft, in, 8 ; <^'e c?oa$, in, 
 13; Ma cymaft, xxi, 8; we abided, vn, 19; doa$ we, in, 14; 
 wutaft gie, x, 11 ; cunnaft gie, xn, 56. 
 
 5. Subject unexpressed : hlinigaS, xni, 29 ; cymeS, xni, 29. 
 
 B. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject : $a celmertmenn f adores mines monigfaldas, 
 xv, 17. 
 
 2. Adjective or demonstrative pronoun-subject : Sas geworftes, 
 I, 20 ; ftas geswigas, xix, 40 ; menigo . . . scecas, xm, 24. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : ^a $e geseas, xiv, 29 ; $a -Se 
 ingeongas, xi, 33 ; "Sa 'Se . . . sittas, i, 79. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject : we abidas, vn, 20 ; #ie gemcetes, 
 n, 12 ; Aia cymes, xi, 33 ; m#es $^e, vi, 46. 
 
 5. Subject unexpressed : cwoeftas, xvii, 21 ; geongas, iv, 36. 
 
 C. Vocalic forms. 
 
 There are fewer curtailed endings in Luke than in any other 
 gospel. Latin indicatives are glossed by vocalic forms in nallo we 
 (nolumus), xix, 14 and gie wodle (vultis), VI, 31. 
 
 John. 
 
 A. Endings in -$. 
 
 1. Noun-subject : %a deado geheraft, V, 25 ; werca getrymeft, v, 
 36 ; streamas . . . flowaft, vn, 38. 
 
 2. Adjective-subject : alle . . . geheraft, v, 28 ; alle . . . cymmeft, 
 xi, 48. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : ftafte gelefaft, 1, 12 ; ftafte neglefaft, 
 VI, 64. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject : gie geseaft, I, 51 ; gie alle wun- 
 driaft, VII, 21 ; gie mec lufaft, xvi, 27 ; gelefeft ge, iv, 48 ; ne 
 habbaft gie, vi, 53. 
 
 B. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject: >a scipo stefn his geheras, x, 3. 
 
36 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 2. Adjective or possessive pronoun-subject : alle cymmes, m, 26 ; 
 alle gelefes, xi, 48 ; ongeattas alle, XIH, 35 ; ongeatas mec mino, 
 x, 14. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : ftafte gewor^ias, iv, 23 ; $a$e . . . 
 getrymesj v, 39. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject : we gesprecas, in, 11 ; hia lifias, 
 V, 25; #ie . . . gedoemas, vin, 15; onfoas gie, in, 11 ; Tie habbas 
 gie, v, 38 ; ne gelefes gie, v, 38. 
 
 5. Subject unexpressed : cwceftas, vn, 26 ; nabbas, xv, 22. 
 
 C. Vocalic endings. 
 
 Vocalic forms are given for the following Latin indicatives : 
 nabbo we (non habemus), XIX, 15 ; woe gegeonge (ibimus), vi, 68 ; 
 ge ncette (non vultis), x, 38 ; we dee (facimus), xi, 47 ; gie hcebbe 
 (habetis), xii, 36 ; and wyrcce we (faciemus), XIV, 23. 
 
 Curtailed endings in the imperative plural are nolle gie (nolite), 
 V, 45, and ncelle gie, vn, 24. 
 
 From the categories given above for the various gospels it is 
 seen that the use of the endings -ft or -s does not depend on the 
 nature of the subject. On the other hand, the curtailed forms are 
 used only when the subject is a personal pronoun and immediately 
 precedes or follows the verb. But even when this last condition 
 is observed, the curtailed endings in all the Early Northern texts 
 are far outnumbered by the full forms in -ft or -s. 
 
 The inflectional -s of the Northern third singular and the indica- 
 tive plural has been explained by Murray, Sweet, and Biilbring 
 [quoted above] as due to the transition of % to s. According to 
 this view, such a transition occurs only in the case of final -ft of 
 the unaccented endings -eft and -aft. This explanation has the 
 advantage of accounting for the origin of -s as an organic process 
 of speech rather than as a result of analogy. Its weakness lies in 
 the inability of its advocates to cite analogous processes outside of 
 these verbal endings. 
 
 But there are other facts that tend to cast suspicion on the cor- 
 rectness of this view. The organic transition from ft to s would 
 explain the plurals in -as but not those in -es, an inflection that 
 occurs frequently in both the indicative and the imperative plural 
 in the Durham Ritual and the Lindisfarne Gospels. In Matthew 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 37 
 
 alone there are seventy-six es-plurals in the indicative and twenty- 
 five in the imperative, a total far too large to be explained as due 
 to scribal errors. 
 
 With these es-plurals should be associated the plurals in -eft 
 common to all the Early Northern texts. Since these texts were 
 written at a period antedating the weakening of a to e in inflectional 
 syllables, these plurals in -eft and -es were probably formed on 
 the analogy of the -eft and -es of the third singular. It is worthy 
 of note here that the inflection -eft in the singular is not restricted 
 to the third person. In all the Early Northern texts, it is occa- 
 sionally used as the inflection of the second singular. 1 Since this 
 -eft is obviously borrowed from the third person, this fact could 
 be interpreted as indicating a close organic relation between the 
 pronunciation of -ft and that of -s. It moreover suggests that the 
 -es of the third person singular could have been borrowed from 
 the second singular, to which it originally belonged. The latter 
 inference would be in harmony with the extention of -s to the first 
 singular in Matthew vm, 9. A parallel to this procedure is found 
 in the Old Norse extension of -r from the second to the third 
 person singular, 2 which may not have been without influence on 
 the Old Northumbrian. In like manner the Old Northumbrian 
 extension of -s to the plural is paralleled by the later Scandinavian 
 use of -r in both singular and plural. 3 To whichever of these 
 causes be assigned the preference, it is probable that both factors 
 the close organic relation between -ft and -s and the extension of 
 the -s originating in the second person singular to the other per- 
 sons of the singular and to the plural were at work in causing 
 the Northern verbal inflection in -s to assert itself to the exclusion 
 of the ft-forms. 4 
 
 1 Sievers, 356, note 2 ; Lindelof, p. 74. 
 
 2 Noreen, Altnordische Grammatik, i, \ 457, note 2. 
 
 3 Lundell, Paul's Grundriss, 2 i, 1488 (quoted above, p. 22). 
 
 4 Lindelof (Die sudnorthumbrische Mundart, p. 129), while discussing such forms 
 as cyme^Sj cweftes in the plural, remarks, ' Es handelt sich hier sicher nicht urn 
 eine schwachung des endungsvocals, bezw. eine iibertragung der endung des sing., 
 sondern, wie die formen cyme's, cwefteft u. s. w. beweisen, urn die anwendung der 
 singularforin in pluralischer function.' But this explanation would not account 
 for geniomes (rapiunt), Lind. Matt, xi, 12 and the frequent use of cymaft, cymas as 
 plurals. Transference of endings is clearly shown in lio/eft (vivet), Lind. John 
 vi, 57 beside the regular liafalS in the next verse. 
 
38 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural 
 
 2. The Middle Northern. 
 
 The investigation of the later Northern dialect is greatly embar- 
 rassed by the non-preservation of any considerable texts that would 
 reveal its development between the beginning of the eleventh 
 and the close of the thirteenth century. 1 In the absence of such 
 transitional texts, the successive changes in the inflection can be 
 inferred only from a knowledge of the conditions that prevailed 
 on each side of this period. 
 
 The earliest published Northern texts of the Middle English 
 period are the Cursor Mundi and the Surtees Psalter. Ten Brink 2 
 and Brandl 3 regard the latter as the older of the two, but its use 
 of Midland inflections detracts from its value as a text, representa- 
 tive of the Northern dialect. The Cursor Mundi, besides being 
 practically contemporaneous 4 with the Psalter, is far more regular 
 in its inflections. 
 
 Cursor Mundi. (c. 1300.) 
 
 The first five thousand lines of MS. Cotton Vespasian A iii. 
 have been selected. 5 According to H. Hupe, this manuscript is in 
 the Durham dialect of the first half of the fourteenth century. 6 
 
 1 The few fragments of this period that are preserved to us contain too often 
 Southern as well as Northern forms. This is the case with the Charter of 
 Ranulph, Bishop of Durham (c. 1099), printed by Hickes (Thesaurus, I, 149), 
 and more accurately by Murray, p. 22. Neither this charter nor the three 
 short fragments by Godric (died 1170), published by Zupitza (Engl. Studien, xr, 
 401-432), contain any present plural indicatives. A Scotch song in derision of 
 the English at the siege of Berwick, 1296 has been preserved in Fabyan's 
 Chronicles (printed by Pynson, 1516 and reprinted by H. Ellis, London, 1811). 
 In this song (p. 398) the imperative plural has the ending -s, but in the later song 
 (p. 440) of 1328 the Southern inflection is used in the indicative plural makyth. 
 
 2 Geschichte der Engl. Litleratur, Strassburg, 1899, I, 332. 
 
 3 Brandl says (Paul's Grundriss 1 , n, 649): 'Das alteste Denkmal, abgesehen 
 von einer Umschreibung der Ancren Riwle, ist vielleicht eine Psalteriibersetzung, 
 bearbeitet nach der Vulgata in kurzen Keimparen, noch mit einigen mittelland- 
 ischen Anklangen in der Sprache und mit einer Steifheit des Stils, wie sie bei 
 einem literarisch ungepflegten Dialekt begreiflich ist.' 
 
 4 The New English Dictionary, s. v. erde and hield respectively, places the date 
 of the Cursor Mundi and of the Psalter before 1300. 
 
 5 Ed. Morris, E. E. T. S., 57 and 59. 
 
 6 On the Filiation and the Text of the MSS. of the Middle-English Poem Cursor 
 Mundi (E. E. T. S., 101, p. 103 and p. 125). 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 39 
 
 A. Endings in -$ : None. 1 
 
 B. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject: many thosand lesis, 6; clerkes sais, 343; 
 thinges halds, 582; dedis . . . tas, 43; mightes . . . wons, 570; 
 beistes . . . has, 4211 ; has beistes, 4216 ; corns god peres, 37; a# 
 watres sinJces (: mans womb . . . drinkes), 535. 
 
 2. Adjective-subject : pis four mas, 1318. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : poem . . . pat rages, 48 ; airs pat 
 cums, 2374; alle pat wonnes, 3706; 6estes . . .pat has, 4219; 
 pynges pat pam likes best, 26 ; pat par singes (: a wet springes), 1031. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject : Als gee wil luue your aun hele, 
 And geildes til your creatur, 1985 ; Sin we wit hus now broght has 
 nan, 3167 ; gee gain me has, 2062. 
 
 C. Uninflected forms. 
 
 1. Noun-subject: None. 
 
 2. Adjective-subject : None. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : There are two instances of the 
 uninflected verb used with a relative pronoun-subject : ful il ha[y] 
 pai pat spending spend pat findes nafro\te~\ par-of at end, 257 and 
 pir chapmen pat haue Joseph boght Un-til Egipte pai haue him 
 broght, 4239. In the first, the whole passage, when compared 
 with the other manuscripts, becomes suspicious. In the second, 
 pat haue was probably caused by pai haue in the next line. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject. 
 
 (a) Pronoun -j- verb : we find, 294 ; pei bring, 1039 ; yee haf, 
 1949 ; we ta, 4790 ; we ha, 4912 ; we prai, 4837 ; gee hald, 2896 ; 
 gee her, 2327 ; we find (: strind), 2143 ; (: wynd), 399 ; pai fall 
 (: bal), 2880; we . . . find (: angel kynd), 361. As the examples 
 in the last section show, the verb should assume the inflected form 
 when at a distance from its subject, but the necessity of rime causes 
 it to assume occasionally the uninflected form. In the Cursor 
 Mundi, the verb has normally the uninflected form if only one 
 word comes between it and its personal pronoun-subject : Quen 
 pai pe see, 2407 ; yee funden have, 4801 ; pai forth cum, 3423. 
 If two or more words intervene, the form in -s is usually required. 
 
 1 Since these endings do not occur in Middle Northern, this category will not 
 again be mentioned. 
 
40 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural, 
 
 The scansion of the lines shows that -e in the present indicative 
 plural does not have syllabic value : Sol elles we come for mikel 
 nede, 4826 ; als ge haue sene inogh and hard, 92 ; For pis resun 
 pat gee haue hard, 551 ; Yee haue noght gain him bot enuy, 4140. 
 From these examples it is seen that -e is frequently written as 
 a supporting vowel for certain consonants or to indicate the length 
 of a preceding vowel, but this usage is by no means uniform. 
 Compare we ha, 4912 and yee haf, 1949 with the forms just given. 
 
 (b) Verb + pronoun : Of all pere liif spend pai pe stage, 50 ; 
 To se pe saul haf ye na might, 580 ; duell pai, 3073 ; find yee, 
 4956 ; haldpai, 2281 ; ha pai, 2849 ; ha we, 5093. Forms in -e 
 occasionally occur but without syllabic value : Wene yee pe king 
 tresur at hydef 4902; Ne haue we wit us trussed noght, 4911. 
 There is only one instance where, from the scansion of the line, 
 the -e could count as a syllable : " Ch&der" he said, " quat rede 
 gee?" 1874. 
 
 In the case of the substantive verb, is frequently occurs with 
 a plural subject: thre thingespam is wit-jn, 354; Elleuen breper es 
 we liuand, 4847. The modals are uninflected throughout. 1 
 
 When used without a pronominal subject, the imperative plural 
 ends in -8 : sittes, 4975 ; ne dos, 2794 ; gas, 4803 ; otherwise the 
 verb is uninflected : " Rises up," he said, " and fie gee sone," 2813 ; 
 hold gee, 2667 ; talc yee, 2898 ; yee tak (: sak), 4799. The unin- 
 flected form is generally used when it is immediately followed 
 by the pronoun-subject of another verb : Lokpai alle be tain, 4896. 
 Quite irregular is the inflection of the second imperative in Bot gas 
 and fals yee him to fote, 4733, where the other manuscripts have 
 the dissyllabic forms falles orfallep and omit yee. 
 
 The Surtees Psalter, (c. 1300.) 
 
 The best of the three manuscripts containing the Surtees Psalter, 
 MS. Cotton, Vespasian D vn, has been edited by J. Stevenson 
 for the Surtees Society 2 and more recently by C. Horstman, 3 who 
 
 1 As this is the case throughout later Northern, the modals will not hereafter 
 be mentioned. 
 
 2 The Publications of the Surtees Society, 1843-1847. 
 
 3 Yorkshire Writers : Richard Eolle of Hampole and his Followers, London, 1896, 
 n, 129 ff. 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 41 
 
 gives all the variants of the other two manuscripts. According to 
 Horstmau, 1 MS. Vespasian D is not earlier than 1350, although 
 the original version may have been written in the preceding century. 
 A study of the language of the Psalter has been made by H. 
 Wende, 2 who however fails to record the n-forms of the present 
 indicative plural in Vespasian D, the most distinctively Northern 
 of all the manuscripts. The first fifty Psalms in the edition of 
 Stevenson, collated with that of Horstman, form the basis of the 
 present investigation. 
 
 A. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject : eglien lokes, x, 5 ; hevens telles, xvin, 2. 
 
 2. Adjective-subject : fele sais, m, 3 ; many . . . sais, iv, 6. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : Ye ere lered pat demes lande, n, 
 10 ; pai pat droves, m, 2 ; al pat wirlces, v, 7 ; VI, 9 ; xin, 4 ; al 
 pat him sekes, xxi, 27 ; pat . . . forthbringes (ipinges), vm, 8. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject : None. 
 
 B. Uninflected forms. 
 
 1. Noun-subject: None. 
 
 2. Demonstrative pronoun-subject : pa hate, xxiv, 19. Here 
 the Harleian MS. reads pai hate, in which the form of the verb 
 is regular. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun -subject : alle pat hope, v, 12; pat love, v, 
 12 ; Folkepine pat leve in pe, xxvii, 9 ; pai pat seke, xxxix, 15 ; 
 whilk love, xxxix, 17; pat traist (Horstman, traiste), XLVIII, 7. 
 Such a large number of indicative plurals in -e with a relative 
 pronoun-subject suggests strong Midland influence. The scribe 
 that was responsible for the Midland forms given in the next 
 section could easily have altered these endings from -es to -e. 
 
 1 Horstman says (pp. 129-130) : ' Stevenson places MS. Vesp. in the middle of 
 Edward IPs reign ; this is a mistake, the MS. is not earlier than 1350, and the 
 two other MSS. are still later. Nevertheless, language and style, and the com- 
 parative rarity of French terms, give the impression of antiquity. All the MSS. 
 are Yorkshire : MS. Vesp. seems to belong to the neighbourhood of R. Rolle. . . . 
 R. Rolle died in 1349 an old man, and his early life belongs to the 13th century. 
 The metrical Psalter might well be a work of his youth, his first attempt. The 
 question is one of difficulty, and I cannot now attempt to solve it.' 
 
 2 Ueberlieferung und Sprache der mittelenglischen Version des Psalters und ihr Ver- 
 hdltnis zur lateinischen Vorlage, Breslau, 1884. 
 
 4 
 
42 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 However, one can not hold the scribe accountable for Wordes of 
 his mouthepat ga (: als swa), xxxv, 4. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject : pal knawe, xm, 4 ; pai wane, 
 xxxvi, 20 ; we here XLVII, 9 ; we calle (: of alle), xvii, 32 ; pai 
 sai (: night and dai), xxxix, 17 ; whi love yhe, TV, 3 ; hou sai ye, 
 x, 2 ; mikil we, x, 5 ; se we, XLVII, 9. 
 
 C. Endings in -n. 
 
 The following Midland forms are found in the present indica- 
 tive plural : pat . . . sayne, iv, 5 ; pat forthgone (perambulant), 
 VIII, 9 ; pat wilen, xxxix, 15; pai sain, XLI, 11 ; and alle pat 
 erden, XLVIII, 2. 
 
 In the case of the sustantive verb, be(ri) is frequently used in the 
 present indicative : pai be (: me), xvii, 37 ; xxxvii, 20 ; pat . . . 
 be (:pe), xxxix, 17 ; pai . . . bene (: bi-dene), xxxvi, 20 ; whereas 
 in the Cursor Mundi, be(n), if used in the indicative, is restricted 
 to the future tense. There is one instance of is used as a plural : 
 And ivels in paire hertes isse (: to neghburgh hisse), xxvii, 3. 
 
 The unconditional imperative plural usually assumes the inflec- 
 tion -s : serves 11, 11 ; Comes and sees, XLV, 9 ; Bihaldes and sees, 
 XLV, 11 ; but occasionally for the sake of rime it may be unin- 
 flected : understande (: lande), n, 10. When the pronominal sub- 
 ject is expressed, the uninflected form is employed : Singes til oure God, 
 singe yhe, XLVI, 7 ; Comes, sones, me yhe here (: sal lere), xxxni, 12. 
 
 Richard Rollers Pricke of Conscience. 1 (a. 1349.) 
 
 A. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject : werkes for-worthes, 780 ; eres waxes, 782 ; 
 herbes . . . bringes, 648 ; clerkes . . . bers, 730 ; eghen rynnes (: he 
 bygynnes), 781 ; tethe rotes (: he dotes), 785 ; spirytes . . . duelles 
 (of angels), 977 ; clerkes caldes (: pe les), 1046 ; many men . . . 
 fr aisles (: he pat traystes), 1090 ; clerkes understandes (: twa handes), 
 
 1257; acordes pe wordex, 1302; commes gudes, 1350; chaunges pe 
 tymes, 1432 ; says clerkes, 2350 ; falles . . . dayes, 758. 
 
 2. Adjective or demonstrative pronoun-subject : many has, 183 ; 
 per four lettes, 253 ; twa . . . lufes, 1844; pas . . . serves, 1081 ; 
 
 1 Ed. Morris, The Philological Society's Early English Volume, 1862-4. The first 
 two thousand five hundred lines have been selected. 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 43 
 
 allepir . . .falles, 800 ; some . . . kepes (: worshepes), 1138 ; dredes 
 ful many, 1766. 
 
 3. Eelative pronoun-subject : pam pat understands and knawes, 
 203 ; many pat trowes . . . bot groches, 303 ; pat standes (: handes), 
 681 ; (: landes), 1000 ; men pat par-in dwelles (: elles), 1073 ; storms 
 pat blawes (: wawes), 1217 ; pa pat . . . greves (: myscheves), 1564 ; 
 pa pat duels (: angels) , 2337. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject : Eotpaifolow, ay, pair awen witte 
 And of noght elles thynkes, ne tas Jiede, 274-5 ; pai trow . . . but 
 groches, 296 ; pai have . . . bot forgettes, 2050. 
 
 B. Uninflected forms. 
 
 1. .Noun-subject : In the first twenty-five hundred lines there 
 are two uninflected plural indicatives with a noun-subject : many 
 men se, 1532 and clerJces prove (: to lufe), 1087. 
 
 2. Adjective-subject : None. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : The single occurrence of the unin- 
 flected plural with a relative pronoun, pat hold pases, 1239, is 
 probably due to an error in writing pat instead of pai. It is 
 noteworthy that at this place three consecutive lines begin with 
 the relative pat. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject : pai knaw, 277 ; pai trow, 296 ; 
 pai do, 1029 ; we lif, 1256 ; we wax, 1298 and 2106 ; yhe here, 
 1303 ; we duelle, 1377 ; we fande, 1463 ; pai life, 1628 ; pai gang 
 (: wrang), 193 ; pai se (: may be), 297 ; we se (: vanite], 1178 and 
 1516; we tyn (: pyn), 1457; we fail (: travail), 1463; pai bere 
 (: feblere), 1502; pai chese (: vanytese), 1583. Unusually distant 
 from the subject are the uninflected forms in When pai pis tretisce 
 here or rede, 343. 
 
 The cases in which the pronoun-subject follows the verb are not 
 numerous. They likewise unite in presenting the uninflected form 
 of the verb, the final -e being without syllabic value. Compare 
 haf we, 1372, 1456, 1459; se we, 1444; and wyn we, 2112 with 
 fynde we, 1368 and lofe we, 1470. 
 
 There are two instances of is with a plural subject : maners pat 
 in the world es (: unstabilnes), 1657, and^>a . . . es (: wrechednes), 
 1169. In this connection it may be noted that was is used with a 
 plural subject in als alle my faders was (: sal pas), 1386. 
 
44 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 Richard Rolle's Prose Treatises.^ (a. 1349.) 
 
 A. Endjngs in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject : angells gernys, 4, 2 ; astronomyenes by-haldes, 
 9, 24; ypocrittes takes, 10, 18; bedells and foresters duse, 11, 20; 
 ihynges makes, 13, 10 and 20 ; takes false crystyn mene, 10, 13 ; 
 sprynges err ours, 17, 31. 
 
 2. Relative pronoun-subject : pay pat drynkes, 3, 31 ; ihay pat 
 files 4, 18 ; men pat lufes, 8, 7 ; deuells pat efforces, 8, 18 ; pat . . . 
 delyttes, 9, 5. 
 
 3. Personal pronoun-subject : thay flye . . . and rystes, 9, 2 ; 
 pay hafe . . . and fastes and wakes and semes, 9, 12; we ere dis- 
 posede and hose, 35, 13; pay fall sumtyme and brekes, 39, 19. 
 
 B. Uninflected forms : 
 
 pay fynd, 4, 25 ; pay say, 9, 26 ; we honour, 10, 17 ; pay come 
 and gaa, 9, 7 ; pay saye, 9, 25 ; we calle, 1, 9 ; ge trauelle, 4, 16 ; 
 pay halde, 8, 11. 
 
 Similar to ic . . . hcefis, Lindisfarne Matthew, vin, 9 is when I 
 here thaym or redis pam, 43, 19 ; but in this case a personal pro- 
 noun, and not a noun, intervenes to cause the assumption of the 
 inflected form. 
 
 North English Legends. 2 (1300-1350.) 
 
 A. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject : palmers walkes, I, 427 ; al men says, vn, 228 ; 
 wurdes proves, x, 84; answers turmentes, x, 168; clerkis has told, 
 XIV, 145; all pe pople . . . loues, n, 194; our e four e bodis lies 
 (: wise), VI, 320 ; men and wemen standes (: seruandes), vii t 200 ; 
 lessons unto us lers (: maners) n, 18. 
 
 2. Indefinite adjective-subject: sum sais, vi, 173; xiu, 173 
 and 174. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : deuils pat ledis, I, 34 ; pam pat 
 kepis, I, 362; who kepis, ill, 131 ; al po pat passes, vi, 18, thinges 
 pat . . . has bene, xiv, 176 ; Maysters pat . . . mase (: rase, pret. 
 pi.), VI, 74; al men pat . . . hase (-.place), VII, 280. 
 
 1 Ed. G. Perry, E. E. T. S., 20. 
 
 2 C. Horstmann, Altenglische Legenden : 7, Die Nordenylische Legendensammlung, 
 Heilbronn, 1881. The first fourteen legends have been selected. 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 45 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject : How ge er bliih, and euir has bene, 
 I, 361 ; pai hold noghtfre bot castes, vii, 280. 
 
 5. Noun and personal pronoun used conjointly as subject : Saynt 
 Steuen and I ligges euyn mete, vi, 275. 
 
 B. Uninflected forms. 
 
 1. Personal pronoun-subject. (a) Pronoun -j- verb : ge call, 
 n, 155 ; pai wirk, vi, 186 ; ge get, vii, 168 ; pai ask, xiv, 165 ; 
 ge by/ore haf, vii, 233 ; pai say (: night and day), 1, 197 ; pai dwell 
 ('fell), in, 27 ; we ken (: men), vii, 165 ; ge stand (: land), vii, 231 ; 
 pai tell (: fell), x, 255 ; ge on call (: ouer-all), I, 39 ; ge now se 
 (: degre), I, 329. 
 
 There are numerous cases of silent final -e used to indicate the 
 length of a preceding vowel or to support certain consonants : pe 
 gudes pat ge haue tane with trayne, n, 452 ; When pai here me neuin 
 Cristes name, x, 100 ; Unto pai come to pat cuntre, IV, 32 ; we rede 
 (: gun lede), I, 279 ; pai rede (: takes hede), in, 20 ; ge forsake 
 (: take), vii, 152 ; we pus writenfnde (: in mynde), n, 90. 
 
 (b) Verb -f- pronoun : find we, II, 7 ; say pai, vii, 91 ; do ge, 
 Vii, 141 ; haf pai, vii, 230 ; haue pai, vii, 218 and 525 ; loue pai, 
 Vii, 353. 
 
 2. Noun-subject : There are four instances of the uninflected 
 verb used with a noun-subject, a number larger than is usually 
 found in other Northern texts of the same length. They are als 
 sum laude men haue said biforn, VI, 6 ; youre hetinges waste, x, 38 ; 
 als clerkes knawe (: lawe), v, 3 ; and als clerkes rede (: wikked dede), 
 vi, 171. 
 
 The imperative plural has the s-form when the subject-pronoun 
 is not expressed : Festes him . . . Bot bindes him, I, 113; Wendis 
 ogayn . . . And lettes me noght, I, 137; Gose, ledes hir, I, 309 ; 
 otherwise the uninflected form is normally employed : Haue ge no 
 thoght, in, 125; no lenger ge stand (: land), vii, 231. The unin- 
 flected form may also be used if a reflexive pronoun-object comes 
 immediately after the verb : " Goes to the wod and get gow wandes 
 And bring pam home bunden in bandes ! And gose to grauell biside 
 pe se And many stones bring es unto me!" vii, 213216. The 
 plural form is occasionally used when only one person is addressed : 
 " Damysell, pat can ge best do. Says, what ge will to him in hy ! " 
 
46 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 i, 432, and Saynt Lucy said : " Moder, takes hede And trewly trous 
 pispatpai rede" in, 19-20. 
 
 Twain and Gawain. 1 (1300-1350.) 
 
 A. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject : wordes greves, 508 ; maidens . . . has, 3349 ; 
 His men . . . has . . . ondfindes, 1655. 
 
 2. Relative pronoun-subject : pam pat herkyns, 4 ; pam pat sais, 
 968 ; maidens pat wirkes, 2992 ; knyghtes pat langes, 3471 ; we pat 
 here suffers, 3044. 
 
 3. Personal pronoun-subject : Whils ge it have and thinkes on me, 
 1530 and 1538. 
 
 B. Uninflected forms. 
 
 (a) Personal pronoun + verb : we wirk, 305 ; we hald, 1246 ; 
 we luf, 2252; ge luf, 1505; ge ask, 1526; ge mak, 2245; ge ga, 
 3007; ge gif, 3293; pai cum, 311; pai say, 1264; pai dwell 
 (: omell), 1435 ; ge knaw (: thraw), 2362 ; ge understand (: land), 
 2665. Supporting final -e is frequently written : pare/ore pai hate 
 me to pe ded, 2162 ; Oft pai bete us wonder sare, 3060 ; ge mende 
 (: ende), 1513 and 2363 ; pai him here (: manere), 302. 
 
 (6) Verb -{- personal pronoun : cum pai, 303 ; hald ge, 1232 ; 
 bicalpai, 2157; seke pai, 769; have ge, 1055. 
 
 Because of the requirement of rime, the verb assumes the unin- 
 flected form with a noun-subject in pe fendes lyf (: gyf), 3040. 
 The uninflected plural also occurs once with a pronoun and a noun 
 used conjointly as subject: He and his menge ha thoght, 1215. 
 There are two instances of is used with a plural subject : hyr willes 
 es (: maystres), 935 and es noght swilk twa, 3590. 
 
 The unconditioned imperative plural normally requires the end- 
 ing -es : understandes (: tithandes), 139 ; (: landes), 1519 ; Takes pe 
 beste and bindes him fast, 3178. The uninflected form is used not 
 only when the pronominal subject is in close contact with the verb 
 but also when it is unexpressed, if the reflexive object is used as an 
 exponent of the verb-form : Avise gow wele, 1511. The uninflected 
 plural may also be used if the form of the verb is made manifest 
 by a following pronoun used as the subject of a dependent verb ; 
 
 1 Ed. G. Schleich, Oppeln und Leipzig, 1887. 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 47 
 
 Luke ge cum, 1514. The frequent use of the s-form when only 
 one person is addressed may sometimes be explained as the employ- 
 ment of the pluralis majestatis, as Takes, 88 and Cumandes, 123 
 (both when Kay is addressing the Queen) and Lates him, 507 (in 
 Y wain's address to the Queen). But the occurrence of inflected 
 and uninflected forms in the same speech lat be, 942 and takes 
 tent, 951 ; dwells, 2361 and socore, 2363 ; Gifes dome and lates us 
 wend, 3428 and Gifes gowre dome and lat us ga, 3442 are to be 
 brought into connection with the interchange of pou and ge (gow : 
 now, 3294; peifre, 3299), which is not always rational. 1 
 
 Lawrence Minot's Poems. 2 (c. 1342.) 
 
 A. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject : goure harmes cumes, vi, 43 ; pe wordes of sir 
 Edward makes, v, 3 ; pe Franche men er . . . And mase, vm, 34. 
 
 2. Adjective-subject : sum ligges, in, 99 ; sais all, v, 88. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : deds pat dose me dere, I, 10. 
 
 B. Uninflected forms. 
 
 1 . Personal pronoun-subject : pai sail, x, 4 ; we knaw (: law), 
 Vii, 125 ; we bigin, (: gyn), vii, 152 ; als we wele ken (: Amen), v, 
 87 ; For pai haue failed of pair e pray, I, 38 ; paifede, x, 5 ; cri 
 pai, I, 69 ; find ge, vi, 19 ; get ge, vm, 3 ; think pai, vm, 36 ; haue 
 pai, i, 51 ; leue ge, vi, 22. 
 
 2. Noun-subject : There are two instances of the uninflected 
 plural with a noun subject : fir galaymen haue wroght, in, 20, and 
 kinges . . . call (: in pall), vii, 112. 
 
 The only occurrence of the inflection -en is in Whare pi felaws 
 lien and gapin (: with pi wapin), vii, 135. 
 
 The Lay Folks' Catechism? (c. 1350.) 
 
 A. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject:' hali saules has, 19; clerkes techis and shewes, 
 79 ; spices springes and spredes, 473; dedis . . . shewes, 36 ^falles 
 four thinges, 282 ; comes . . . spices, 466. 
 
 1 See Schleich's remark on 1. 86. 
 
 2 Ed. W. Scholle, Quelten und Forschungen, LIT. 
 3 Ed. Simmons and Nolloth, E. E. T. S., 118. 
 
48 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 2. Adjective-subject : twa lies, 274 ; thre first teches, 383 ; al 
 othir comes, 453; thre . . . clenses, 315. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : al creatures that loues, 30 ; all that 
 haves, 60 ; tham that . . . tas, 337. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject; Als we sklaundir or backbite or 
 falsly defames, Or fandes, 210; we gete, or tas, 244; we will noght 
 do . . . Bot anely haldes, 521. 
 
 B. Uninflected forms : 
 
 we sla, 209 ; we do, 261 ; we think, 267 ; we haf, 312 and 313 ; 
 we have, 311 ; we bere, 23 ; thai come, 68 ; we loue, 265 ; thai gastely 
 sla, 455. 
 
 There is one instance of is with a plural subject : And in this 
 commandement isforboden us Alkyns mysbileues, 175. 
 
 The York Plays} (c. 1430-1440.) 2 
 
 A. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject : wordis makis . . . and chaunges, x, 275 ; 
 myses bytis, XI, 274; beestis lyes, xi, 295; all pepul prayes (: all 
 weyes), X, 182; comes . . . cares, ix, 9. 
 
 2. Relative pronoun-subject: po pat lykys, n, 11 ; vertues pat 
 longes, v, 48 ; we that haues, v, 164; Jewes pat wonnes, xi, 31 and 
 161 ; loppis that . . . makis, xr, 294. 
 
 3. Personal pronoun-subject : ge wax . . . and growes, n, 84 ; 
 we . . . hose, x, 357. The irregular you eates, iv, 57 is probably 
 an error for pou eates ; compare Thowe speydes in the next line. 
 Likewise abnormal is the ending -s in Why crys you swa f xi, 257, 
 which has a parallel in the imperative Takis ge entent, ix, 46. 
 
 B. Uninflected forms. 
 
 (a) Personal pronoun -j- verb : ghe ly, I, 115 and 118 ; pai assent, 
 n, 5 : we neyd, iv, 39 ; ye speyd, iv, 89 ; we on call (: shall), iv, 
 49 ; ye ga (:fra, twa, wa), vi, 19 ; ye go (: wo), vi, 55 ; (: my to), 
 VII, 81 ; we pray (: pat maye), ix, 164 ; we kenn (: ten, Jessen, men), 
 
 1 Ed. Lucy Toulmin Smith, Oxford, 1885. Twelve plays have been chosen for 
 study. 
 
 2 Although the plays were probably composed about 1340-1350, the manuscript 
 dates approximately from 1430-1440. Miss Smith's Introduction, p. xviii and p. 
 xlv. 
 
f UN' 
 
 v& 
 
 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 49 
 
 XI, 49 ; they ken (: Jessen), xi, 323 ; pei in dwell (: Israeli), xi, 186 ; 
 we z0efe warrand (ifande, third pret. sg.), xi, 221. 
 
 Silent -e is frequently written as a supporting vowel, even though 
 it may be altogether unnecessary : And sen pai wrange haue wroght, 
 II, 7 ; We love the, mooste of myght, iv, 48 ; Looke that ye doe as ye 
 haue sayd, TV, 80 ; we wirke, ix, 300 ; pei mene, x, 1 21 ; we come, 
 x, 150; we bonne, xi, 257; pay fele, xi, 275; we graunte, xi, 
 353; ge sitte (: gitt], ix, 184; we wende (: is sende), vi, 168; we 
 warande (ifande, lande, thowsande), xi, 54. 
 
 (6) Verb -f- personal pronoun : w% ea ye noght? v, 29 ; .How 
 do ZAm/f xi, 321 ; fare we, IV, 64; gette wee, x, 166 ; sitte they, 
 xi, 325. 
 
 There is one instance of the irregular use of the uninflected verb 
 with a noun-subject : leues last, xi, 102 ; and also one case of -en 
 in the indicative plural : Jewes . . . faren, xi, 303. The unin- 
 flected form in all that me wyrschippe sail wone here, I, 137 is an 
 error probably due to the dropping of -s before the initial -s of sail. 
 
 The extension of -s to the first singular occurs when the verb is 
 at a distance from its subject, as in I with my worde hase wrothe, II, 
 80. Through analogy with the s-plurals, is as well as ar may be 
 used with a plural subject : In erthe is trees, in, 9 ; all thynges is 
 mayd, iv, 60 ; dayntys that is, iv, 97. 
 
 The imperative plural has, as a rule, the ending -s when the 
 subject-pronoun is not in immediate contact with the verb : helpes, 
 XI, 81 ; Beeths, XI, 197 ; comes forth ge two, m, 94; Wendes and 
 spers youre dores, ix, 161 ; Lovis me for-thy and loues me aye, in, 
 36 ; Beis . . . comes . . . Haves, xi, 367. The uninflected plural 
 which, with the exception of Takis ge, ix, 46, is everywhere used 
 when the subject-pronoun is postpositive Goo yhe, v, 173; wytt 
 ye, vi, 15; bide ge, x, 145 has been extended to cases where this 
 is replaced by the reflexive object-pronoun : mayke you, iv, 55 ; 
 holde yow, n, 29. The uninflected form is likewise frequently used 
 when the imperative is followed by the pronominal subject of a 
 dependent verb : Looke that ye bothe saue and sett, iv, 24 ; Looke 
 that ye do, iv, 80 ; Dwell here yf that ye canne, iv, 29. From 
 instances like the last it was but a step to the use of the uninflected 
 plural dissociated from the idea of a pronominal subject or object 
 expressed in the same clause. Thus we have kepe, iv, 91 and x, 
 5 
 
50 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 149 ; Love . . . harken . . . do, iv, 50 ; and Alle creatures to me 
 take tent, vi, 1. However, the number of uninflected plurals in 
 such cases as these is, in the York Plays, far exceeded by the full 
 inflections in -s. 
 
 The Towneley Plays. 1 (1350-1450.) 2 
 
 A. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject: tythyngys mekyll amendys, ix, 149; men . . . 
 blowys (: lawes), ix, 94. 
 
 2. Adjective-subject : all trowes, vii, 10 ; all bowys, ix, 20. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : ye all that standys, 1, 157 ; all that 
 beris, in, 105 ; showers that renys, in, 351 ; that lofys, vi, 142. 
 
 B. Uninflected forms. 
 
 (a) Personal pronoun -f- verb : we call, I, 25 ; ye wax, I, 191 ; 
 we thank, I, 208 ; thay incres, vin, 53 ; thai leyf, vin, 350 ; ye luf, 
 IX, 133 ; thay ryn (: in), in, 357 ; we trus (: us), vii, 152 ; we ken 
 (: ten, men), vin, 53; thay dwell (: emell), vin, 199; ye . . . ken 
 (: men), 11, 16; we . . . call (: I shall), IV, 2 ; ye . . . gang 
 (: lang), xi, 11. 
 
 Silent final -e is frequently written : We lofe the, lord, with all 
 oure thoght, I, 75 ; here ar well moo then we have seen, I, 237 ; thay 
 multiplye, vm, 37 ; we fare, vin, 305 ; we drowne (: bowne, downe), 
 Viii, 414. 
 
 (b) Verb + personal pronoun : get we, II, 82 ; Why cry ye so f 
 Vin, 270 ; how do thay, vin, 333 ; haue we, 1, 151 ; how fayre ye? 
 m, 190. 
 
 Strongly suggestive of Midland influence is the large number of 
 uninflected plurals used with a noun or relative pronoun : elders 
 haue, 11, 101 ; prayers haue, iv, 66 ; mystis . . . byte, vin, 287 ; 
 folk haue, vin, 313 ; Jues . . . fayre, vin, 315 ; floures that smell? 
 I, 239 ; all that wyrk, n, 70 ; that make, vin, 34 ; Jues that won, 
 Viii, 35; that kepe, viii, 62; we that . . . haue, I, 251. The 
 Midland -en occurs once : whits that ye liffen (: has giffen), n, 447, 
 
 1 Ed. G. England, E. E. T. S., Extra Series, LXXI. Eleven plays have been 
 selected. 
 
 a Ten Brink (n, 266) assigns the manuscript to the beginning of the fifteenth 
 century. 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 51 
 
 as does also the ending -th : thise tythyngys doth, ix, 168. There 
 is one case of -th in the first singular : I . . . hath, x, 2, and one 
 instance of is used with a plural subject : Greatte mystis, sir, ther 
 is, vin, 286. 
 
 Also in the inflection of the imperative plural a divergence from 
 the usage of the York Plays is noticed. In the York Plays the 
 unconditioned plural normally assumes the ending -s, but in the 
 Toivneley Plays the uninflected forms are almost exclusively used : 
 herkyn, vn, 2 and 91 ; browke, II, 447; hold, vi, 131 ; heyf, VIII, 
 41 2 ; blyn (: wytt you wyri), vm, 210, twenty-three in all. The 
 s-plural is used only twice : herkyns, I, 260 and vn, 31. 
 
 Wyntoun's Orygynale Cronykil. 1 (c. 1420.) 
 
 A. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject: ryvarys ragys, i, 963; steddys growys, I, 
 1344; hyrdys hydys, I, 1 350 ; pylgrymys mais, II, 1672; yheris 
 hapnys, in, 662 ; mudrys . . . berys, I, 702 ; landys lyis (: Tessalyis), 
 II, 1234 ; (: Paradys), I, 544 ; autoris . . . sayis (: wayis), II, 842 ; 
 cymmys fludis, I, 129 ; lyis the landys, I, 1067. 
 
 2. Indefinite adjective- or demonstrative pronoun-subject : syndry 
 haldys, I, 309 ; sum oysis, I, 1091 ; thir lyis, I, 1198. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : us that lywys, I, 708 ; watterys that 
 cummys, I, 924 ; quha passys, I, 946 ; quha sekys, I, 1006 ; Thai 
 that hafys thaire mater e, Or felys, II, 612. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject : we . . . reknys, I, 300 ; thai . . . 
 has, I, 817 ; thai . . . sayis, n, 800. The inflected form when 
 the verb is in direct contact with the subject occurs twice : thai 
 oysis, i, 665, and thai spekys, u, 857. The irregularity of this 
 usage is shown by the normal thai oys, I, 661, 1167, 1265, n, 797 ; 
 we oys, i, 1217, 1328, 1682, 1714, n, 768; and we ws, u, 765. 
 
 B. Uninflected forms. 
 
 (a) Pronoun -f-'verb: we fynd, I, 55 ; thai tak, I, 154; we call, 
 i, 388 ; thai ly, I, 1192 ; yhe ga, n, 866 ; thai say (: day), n, 373 ; 
 thai bere and get (: but let], I, 652 ; thai ly (: lychtly), 1, 1411 ; we ta 
 
 1 Ed. David Laing, The Historians of Scotland, vols. n, in, ix, Edinburgh, 
 1872-79. The first three books form the basis of the present investigation. 
 
52 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 (: alsua), VII, 523. Silent -e is frequently written, usually to indi- 
 cate the length of the preceding vowel : yhe here, L, 782 ; we halde, 
 I, 1404; we fynde, I, 1736 ; thai halde and hawe (: gawe, preterit 
 singular), I, 88 ; yhe crepe (: kepe), ill, 876. 
 
 (b) Verb -f pronoun : hawe yhe, I, 1103 ; calle we, I, 1246 ; mak 
 thai, II, 1157. 
 
 The unconditional imperative plural requires, as a rule, the form 
 in -s, but uninflected forms are also occasionally found. 
 
 Gilbert of the Haye's The Buke of the Law of Armys, or Buke 
 of Bataillis. 1 (1456.) 
 
 A. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject: treis has, 9, 14; clerkis cattis, 12, 36; seven 
 angelis betakenis, 15, 11; wateris gerris, 20, 24 ; hony beis cum- 
 mys . . . and takis, 20, 18 ; departis all othir wateris, 12, 24. 
 
 2. Relative pronoun-subject: the quhilkis tynis, 16, 27; that 
 pertenis, 33, 14; quhilkis traistis . . . bot has . . . bot lyvis, 16, 26 ; 
 that . . . has, 7, 10; namys that eftir cummys, 16, 9. 
 
 B. Uninflected forms : we see, 5, 3 ; thai understand, 9, 1 ; thai 
 syn, 16, 30; thai do, 30, 33; thai touch, 33, 27; ge have, 13, 28 ; 
 thai ressave, 30, 9. 
 
 There are numerous instances of is used as a plural. In the 
 majority of cases the subject follows the verb, the tendency being 
 to use ar when the subject precedes. This distinction is illustrated 
 by is understandin the symple peple that ar, 30, 22. Both nouns 
 and relative pronouns may be used as the subject of is : thre 
 maneris . . . is, 25, 30 ; the weris that is, 7, 7. 
 
 A similar tendency is observable in the case of the expletive use 
 of was with a plural subject, which has also been extended to cases 
 where the subject precedes : Apostolis was 8, 17 ; thame that was f 
 7, 15. 
 
 There are two instances of the apparent extension of the inflec- 
 tion -s to the infinitive : And as to the see agayne passis all wateris, 
 sa dois all sciencis in this warld redoundis agayne to holy scripture, 
 12, 24 ; And rycht sa dois the fals opyniouns of herisy makis the 
 
 1 Ed. J. H. Stevenson, 8. T. S., 1901. The First Part has been chosen for 
 study. 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 53 
 
 holy scripture sa bitter, 20, 20. Since these are the only cases of 
 this kind and both occur with dois, it is probable that redoundis 
 and makis were felt as finite verbs and not as infinitives. In these 
 two parallel constructions, dois is not to be regarded as an 
 emphatic auxiliary but, in connection with the adverb of manner 
 sa, is to be considered as anticipatory of the action of the real verb. 
 
 Barbour's Bruce. 1 (c. 1375; MS. 1487.) 
 
 A. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject : Ynglis men has, iv, 648 ; all menfleis, ix, 90 ; 
 His fay is hym haldis, vii, 251 ; flearis thair wais tais (: can chas), 
 VI, 436. 
 
 2. Relative pronoun-subject : thingis that makis, iv, 533 ; thame 
 that haldis, iv, 726 ; us that ydill lyis, iv, 345 ; that . . . haldis, 
 IV, 349. 
 
 3. Personal pronoun-subject : thai to mankind has, iv, 225 ; 
 thai . . . has, iv, 365; VI, 550; vii, 313; vin, 478; thai . . . 
 haldis, iv, 541 ; thai . . . makis, iv, 691. Unusual is the form 
 has in contact with the verb : And quhen at thai has seyn the 
 kyng, vn, 283. 
 
 B. Uninflected forms. 
 
 (a) Personal pronoun -f verb : thai mak, iv, 235 and 528 ; ghe 
 #peir, iv, 494 ; ge knaw, iv, 520 ; we haf, TV, 532 ; VI, 541 ; vii, 
 45 ; thai ly, v, 81 ; vn, 314 ; we cum, vin, 248 ; ge chasty me, ix, 
 742 ; ge now haf, iv, 652 ; thai occupy (: mercy), iv, 524 ; thai tell 
 (ifell), vii, 56 ; thai ly (: halely), vii, 539 ; thai hyde, iv, 375 ; thai 
 haue, vii, 265 ; we drede, vn, 444. 
 
 (6) Verb -f- personal pronoun : call thai, iv, 205 ; sa ghe, vn, 
 258 ; trow ge, ix, 82 ; think ge, ix, 228 ; hafpai, ix, 717. 
 
 The imperative plural usually requires the inflected form when 
 the pronominal subject is not in close contact with the verb : hangis 
 and drawis! iv, 322; haldis, vn, 123; thinkis, vm, 253; but 
 abide ghe heir, vn, 10. The uninflected form may furthermore be 
 
 1 Ed. Skeat, S. T. S., 1893-1895. The best manuscript is the one in St. John's 
 College, Cambridge, which begins at line 57 of Book iv. Skeat's Preface, p. 
 Ixix. I have selected a passage running from Book iv, line 57 to Book ix in- 
 clusive. 
 
54 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 used with a postpositive reflexive object : mak gow gair, iv, 626, 
 and has also extended itself to many plurals the subjects of which 
 are remote or unexpressed : Bot haf ghe hardyment, cum ner . . . 
 Wyn me, vn, 439. 
 
 In the part of the Bruce quoted in Wyntoun's Cronyldl (printed 
 by Skeat, p. xciii ff.), only the following present indicative plurals 
 occur : Wys men sayis, 210 ; That . . . afferis, 2678 ; Thai sla . . . 
 And haldis, 2775 ; yhe hawe, 2782. 
 
 Eobert Henryson's Poems. 1 (c. 1475-1500.) 
 
 The poems selected are Orpheus and Eurydice (O), The Lyoun 
 and the Mous (L), Robene and Makyne (R), and The Bludy Serk (8). 
 
 A. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject: deidis fattiSj 0, 513; scheip gois, R, 30; men 
 cumis, 8, 78. 
 
 2. Adjective-subject : thir ihre turnis, 0, 483 ; mony fallis, 609. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : thame Quhilk . . . havis, L, 181. 
 
 B. Uninflected forms : 
 
 we flee, 0, 438 ; we cast, 453 ; we call, 462 ; thai incur, 548 ; we 
 tak (: wrak), 458 ; we rede, 477 ; ye knaw, L, 71 ; ye haif, 165 ; 
 thay se, 184; thay dreid, 185; haif ye, 80. 
 
 The imperative plural is uninflected whether the pronominal 
 subject is expressed or not : Cum help, cum help, L, 147 ; Go, louse 
 him sone, 154; Tak ye . . . And hing, 8, 76 ; Think, 120. 
 
 Intrusion of -s into the first singular is seen in Now am I tane 
 . . . and traistis, L, 20 and I knaw, Bot keipis, R, 11. 
 
 Dunbar's The Tua Mariit Wemen and the Wedo. 2 (a. 1503.) 
 
 A. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject : Birdis hes, 60 ; women has and . . . convoyis, 
 453 ; frendis . . . behaldis, 436 ; glowis my chaftis, 1 08 ; wateris 
 myn ene, and welteris doune teris, 439 ; dois thir damysellis, 457. 
 
 2. Indefinite adjective-subject: Sum rownis ; and sum ralgeis ; 
 and sum redis ballatis, 480. 
 
 x Ed. David Laing, Edinburgh, 1865. 
 
 2 Ed. John Small, The Poems of William Dunbar, S. T. S., 1884-93. 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 55 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : hairteis that stryveis, 59 ; that sittis, 
 440; that . . . ioyis . . . andfangis . . . and lattis, 62 ; that . . . 
 haldis . . . et delis, 458. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject : ge gour fayth hes, 45. 
 
 B. Uninflected forms. 
 
 (a) Personal pronoun -f verb : ge call, 50 ; ge speir, 52 ; thai 
 pleis, 63; thai lak, 67 ; ge speik, 205; we set, 449 ; we dule, 450; 
 ge so blist call, 235. 
 
 (6) Verb -f personal pronoun : think ge, 47 ; haif ge, 153 ; sleip 
 ge, 221 ; say thai, 440 ; se ge, 440. 
 
 Throughout this poem the imperative plural is uninflected both 
 when the subject-pronoun is used : ge lyth and leir, 257, and when 
 it is omitted : be constant . . . and counterfeit, 259 ; Lady is, leir 
 thir lessonis et be, 503. 
 
 Most of the narrative is in the first person, and as a consequence 
 there are eleven cases of -s in the first singular. In one of these 
 the pronoun is in direct contact with the verb : I murdris, 212, 
 which should be compared with Imus[e] . . . and murnys, 211-212. 
 
 In the poem beginning with We Lordis hes chosin a chiftane 
 mervellus, the first line illustrates the influence which a noun in 
 apposition with a personal pronoun-subject may have on the form 
 of the verb that follows. The imperative Gladethe thoue Queyne 
 of Scottis regioun shows the influence of Southern literary models 
 and illustrates the incongruity in the choice of forms that frequently 
 attends such borrowing. 
 
 The New Testament in Scots. St. Luke. 1 (c. 1520.) 
 
 A. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject: myn een has sene, u, 30; synnaris luvis, vi, 
 32 ; foxis has, ix, 58 ; thouchtis cummis, xxrv, 38 ; discipilis . . . 
 fastis oft and makis, v, 33 ; castis out your sonnis, XI, 19. 
 
 2. Indefinite adjective or demonstrative or possessive pronoun- 
 subject : thin [thine] etis and drinkis, v, 33; thir has, vm, 13; 
 vtheris sais, IX, 29 ; mony seekis, xin, 24. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : thame that sittes, I, 79 ; riche men 
 that has your confort, vi, 24 ; thir that heres, viu, 12 ; een that seis, 
 
 1 Ed. T. G. Law, S. T. S., 1901. 
 
56 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 x, 23 ; Ye it ar that justifies you, xvi, 15 ; ye it ar that has duellit, 
 xxn, 28 ; that . . . luves, xx, 46. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject : Thai that ar hale has, v, 31 ; 
 ye . . . dais, VI, 46 ; thai ga . . . and bringis, vm, 14 ; ye . . . 
 tuiches, xi, 46 ; /e 2/owr se//* entris, XI, 52 but we ow se/f /iawe Aerde, 
 xxn, 71 ; ^Aay labour nocht, nouthir spynnis, xn, 27 ; ye Phariseis 
 clengis, xi, 39. 
 
 B. Uninflected forms. 
 
 (a) Personal pronoun -j- verb : thai gang, iv, 36 ; ye met, vi, 
 38 ; thai ga, vm, 13 ; thai obey, vm, 25 ; thai cum, xvn, 1 ; ^* 
 do, XVIII, 34 ; ye hope, VI, 34 ; thai beteue, vin, 13 ', we perise, 
 VIII, 24 ; </iai en^Ve and duette, XI, 26 ; ^e our self haue, xxn, 71. 
 
 (6) Verb -\- personal pronoun : haf we, iv, 23 ; think ye, v, 22 ; 
 do ye, vi, 2 ; cal ye, vi, 46 ; say ye, ix, 20 ; unbind ye, xix, 33 ; 
 Quhy ete ye and drink f v, 30 ; slepe ye, xxn, 46 ; seke ye, XXIV, 5. 
 
 There are three instances of the uninflected plural used with the 
 relative pronoun : almen that duett, xm, 4; thai that haue money, 
 xvm, 24 ; thai that haue power, xxn, 25. 
 
 The imperative plural is uninflected throughout : mak ye, in, 4 ; 
 joy ye, vi, 24 ; lufe ye, VI, 27 ; blesse ye, vi, 28 ; unbind ye him, 
 and bring to me, xix, 30. In every instance the subject-pronoun 
 is expressed, although it may be remote from the verb as in ga 
 away fra me, at ye wirkaris of wickitnes, xm, 27. 
 
 The form of the second infinitive in suffir me first to ga and 
 beryse my fader, ix, 59 is due to the analogy of words from the 
 French like peryss, perisch. 1 
 
 Gavin Douglas Translation of the Aeneid. 2 (c. 1525.) 
 
 A. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject: two, wourdis gais, 11, 28; logitianis knawis, 
 15, 13 ; Troianis frakkis, 24, 12 ; wallis risis, 46, 11 ; fludes rynnis, 
 56, 7 ; expositouris . . . makis, 14, 20 ; Italianis . . . callis 
 (: wallis), 28, 21 ; salis the Troianis, 24, 3 ; risis yone large wallis, 
 42, 15. 
 
 l Cf. N. E.D.8.v. l bury.' 
 
 2 Ed. John Small, The Poetical Works of Gavin Douglas, Edinburgh, 1874. I 
 have selected the Prologue and the first book of the Aeneid. 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 57 
 
 2. Indefinite adjective-subject: sum cheisis, 45, 16. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject : thai quhilk haitis, 42, 7 ; quhilk . . . 
 remanis, 24, 3; buikis . . . quhilk contenis, 11, 8. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject : thai ceis and . . . gewis, 30, 26 ; 
 we . . . hes, 36, 4 ; ^e ... hes, 42, 32. 
 
 B. Uninflected forms. 
 
 1. Personal pronoun-subject : we se (: tre), 12, 23 ; (: he), 64, 20 ; 
 ge fynd, 14, 6 ; thai say (: away), 28, 20 ; (: Hisperia), 51, 26 ; 
 thai ceis, 30, 26 ; we ken (: men), 36, 10 ; we neid, 52, 24 ; thai sa 
 {: Phrygia), 56, 28 ; thai us deny (: by), 52, 11 ; we gou pray, 57, 
 12 ; we compile, 15, 24 ; pai mene (: Iwene), 15, 28 ; haue ge, 33, 16. 
 
 2. JSToun-subject : heir and thair stand large cragis and brais, 
 31, 12 ; Ciclopes dwell (-.fell), 33, 18. 
 
 O. Endings in -th : 
 
 Thi saivis in sic eloquence doith fleit, 5, 17 ; doith clerkis, 10, 7 ; 
 thair doith ane hundrelh altaris stand, 44, 30 ; fatis . . . haith 
 {: braith), 52, 21. 
 
 In addition to these four cases in the plural, the ending -th 
 occurs five times in the third singular : the rois . . . doith excell, 
 3, 16; also 13, 14; 56, 9; 61, 13; and 66, 13 where -th follows 
 -s : Albeit my spreit abhorris, and doith grise. The contracted form 
 in the third singular occurs once : now slant the chief police, 10, 17. 
 
 Inflected and uninflected forms are used interchangeably in the 
 imperative plural when the subject is not expressed : traistis, 8, 25 ; 
 9, 13; 11, 1, but traste, 9, 20 and traist with remote subject, 11, 
 22; gewis, 19, 11 but reid, 17, 9; pluk, 33, 39; and be, 33, 26. 
 Transition from the inflected to the uninflected form often occurs : 
 reidis . . . and cast, 11, 26; beis . . . do, 19, 9; beis . . . con- 
 siddir . . . reid, 6, 22. Here one case of inflection is felt to be 
 sufficient for the whole context, and consequently the first verb is 
 the one inflected. 'The inflected form occasionally intrudes into the 
 imperative singular : beis, 40, 18. 
 
 The influence of Southern literary models on Douglas is also 
 revealed by the frequent use of bene instead of ar in the present 
 indicative plural. The use of is with a plural subject occurs once : 
 stickis . . . laid is, 32, 9. A preceding plural subject is also found 
 with was: cupplis festnyt was (: bras), 4630, and poetis that sens 
 
58 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 was, 5, 14. In the first singular, -is occurs three times : J . . . 
 speikis, 6, 28 ; I defend and forbiddis, 12, 9; I that . . . tursis, 
 43,4. 
 
 The Complaynt of Scotlande. 1 (1548 or 1549.) 
 
 A. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject: inuasions aperis,!, 13; battellis consistis, 15, 
 24 ; dominions altris, dechaeis, ande cummis, 21, 27 ; volfis . . . 
 hes, 2, 23 ; childir . . . grouis and incressis, 20, 7 ; hes bene diuerse 
 translatours, 16, 19. 
 
 2. Adjective-subject : mony of us beleuis, 32, 5 ; mony of us 
 ihynkis, 32, 14 ; ane hundretht lyuis, 35, 20. 
 
 3. Relative pronoun-subject: plagis quhilk hes, I, 15; enemeis 
 that lyis, 4, 2; them that fechtis, 15, 4; thai that imputis, 22, 17; 
 vs that professiSj 31, 9 ; quhilk prouokis, 34, 12. 
 
 4. Personal pronoun-subject : ge daly of g our gudnes induris, 3, 
 20 ; thai see, or heris tel, 14, 8 ; ve seik . . . nor resistis, 34, 33. 
 
 B. Uninflected forms : 
 
 ve hef, 17, 15; tha begyn, 20, 9; ve hold, 31, 23; ve thynk, 32, 
 14 ; ve cal, 32, 33 ; ve pas, 34, 17 ; ve beeum, 34, 34 ; thai persaue, 
 9, 19; thaipleyse, 20, 1 ; ve beleue, 32, 10; ve adhere, 34, 27. 
 
 There are seven instances of is with a plural subject. In each 
 case the subject follows the verb : as, nor is the famous atentic 
 croniklis, 3, 26 ; ther is mony vordis, 16, 34. Was is preceded by 
 a plural subject three times : offrandis that vas, 8, 3 ; them that vas, 
 15, 8 and 9. The form of the verb in / . . . hes tane is due to 
 analogy with the second and third singular when the verb is re- 
 mote from its subject. 
 
 Sir David Lyndsay. The Dreme and The Testament and 
 Complaynt of the Papyngo. 2 (c. 1550.) 
 
 A. Endings in -s. 
 
 1. Noun-subject: clerkis dois, D, 349 and 495; Poetis callis, 
 394 ; Astrologis sayis (: dayis), 400 ; wolfis cumis, 899 ; dayis 
 
 1 Ed. Murray, E. E. T. S., Extra Series, xvii and xviu, 1872. I have selected 
 Ane Epistil to the Qvenis Grace, the Prolog to the Redar, and the first five chapters 
 of the Complaynt. 
 
 2 The Poetical Works of Sir David Lyndsay of the Mount, edited by David Laing, 
 Edinburgh, 1871. 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 59 
 
 induris, P, 321 ; clatter aris loupis, 391 ; Inglismen say is, 575 ; 
 wyffis . . . cry is, 712; faces provokis, 868. 
 
 2. Relative pronoun-subject: thame that fixis, D, 133 ; stedys 
 that drawis, 438 ; the quhilkis excellentlye makis, 521 ; the quhilkis 
 hes, 886 ; quho dois, P, 399 ; that . . . dois, 982. 
 
 3. Personal pronoun-subject : thay wyrk . . . and hes, 945. In 
 this example where the verb is remote from its pronominal subject, 
 the form in -s is normal. But in God wot geve we hes neid of lyves 
 fude, 674, the inflected form stands in direct contact with the per- 
 sonal pronoun, which fact affords ground for the suspicion that the 
 text is at fault. 
 
 B. Uninflected forms. 
 
 1. Personal pronoun -f- verb : thay se, D, 326 ; thay heir, 327 ; 
 we want, 829 ; thay call, 931 ; thay dispone, 206 ; thay move, 506 ; 
 thay do, P, 39 ; ye get, 624; thay stand, 644; ye haif, 691 ; thai 
 persaue, 713; thayjuge, 758; we thee beseik, 742. 
 
 2. Verb -j- personal pronoun : laik we, D, 826 ; want we, 873 ; 
 traist ye, P, 855 ; mak ye, 1155. 
 
 In Lyndsay the imperative plural is uninflected even when the 
 subject-pronoun is not expressed : imprent, P, 348 ; Lat . . . traist, 
 371 ; marke, 521 ; presume, 600; be, 1011 ; depart, 1090. 
 
 The Midland plural bene instead of the Northern ar is very 
 common in the present indicative. Its frequent use with a singu- 
 lar subject suggests misapprehension on the part of Lyndsay as to 
 its true grammatical significance : the trew translatioun Of Virgill, 
 quhilk bene consolatioun, P, 34 ; no thyng bene, 213 ; ilke court bene, 
 367 ; One thyng thare bene, 441 ; My wytt bene waik, 474 ; Quhare 
 Christ bene kyng, 613; thy burgh bene, 645; me that bene, 734. 
 There are two instances of is with a plural subject : Thare is none 
 eiris, D, 594, and thare is few, 944. It has intruded into the first 
 singular in I Quhilk cummyng is, D, 155, the extension being 
 favored by the analogy of I persave . . . and considderis, 816, and 
 Jam ... and hes, P, 671. 
 
 Southern influence is betrayed by the numerous endings in -th 
 both in the singular : JEuropa doith stand, D, 674 ; My syster . . 
 haith, 948 : sapience transcendith, P, 9 ; quhilk desyrith, 44 ; one 
 doith oppresse, 334, and in the plural : wolfis . . . doith, D, 912; 
 quhilks kepith, P, 73; Poetis of me haith, 203; peple sayith, 770. 
 
60 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 The investigation of the inflection of the present plural indica- 
 tive has also been carried through parts or the whole of the 
 following texts, which observe the same distinctions in the use of 
 the plural forms as those already treated : Evangelium Nicodemi, 
 edited by C. Horstman (Herrig's Archiv, LIII, 389-424); The 
 Kingis Quair, edited by W. W. Skeat (S. T. S., 1884); Ratis 
 Raving, edited by J. R. Lumby (E. E. T. S., 1870); Rauf Coil- 
 year and Sir Richard Holland's The Buke of the Howlat, both edited 
 by F. J. Amours (Scottish Alliterative Poems in Riming Stanzas, 
 S. T. S., 1892-97); Henry the Minstrel's Schir William Wallace, 
 edited by James Moir (S. T. S., 1885-89) ; John Bellenden's 
 Translation of Livy's History of Rome, edited by W. A. Craigie 
 (S. T. S., 1901); The Historie and Chronicles of Scotland by 
 Robert Lindesay of Pitscottie, edited by M. J. G. Mackay (S. T. S., 
 1899 ; also Thomas of Erceldoune, edited by Brandl (Sammlung 
 engl. Denkmaler in Jcritischen Ausgaben, II, Berlin, 1880) ; The 
 Pistill of Susan, The Awntyrs off Arthure at the Terne Wathelyne, 
 and The Knightly Tale of Golagros and Gawane, edited by F. J. 
 Amours (S. T. S., 1892-97). 
 
CONCLUSION. 
 
 To sum up in conclusion the historical development of the forms 
 of the plural, we find that in Early Northern the inflections -p and 
 -s are used without regard to the nature of the subject. This is not 
 the case, however, with the vocalic endings, which are used only 
 when the subject is a personal pronoun in immediate contact with 
 the verb. If the verb is separated from its personal pronoun-sub- 
 ject by only one word, the Early Northern texts unite in presenting 
 the full form in -p or -s for the indicative plural. The verb likewise 
 assumes the full inflection when the subject is unexpressed, but to this 
 rule there are two exceptions, both occurring in the Ritual. 
 
 As we advance to Middle Northern, the first striking phenome- 
 non we meet is the total disappearance of the inflection -p. The -s 
 of the Early Northern still persists, whereas all the vocalic endings 
 have been reduced to -(e), which is usually without syllabic value in 
 texts as early as the Cursor Mundi and the Surtees Psalter. But a 
 change has taken place in the functions of these endings. Economy 
 of speech demanded that the work assigned to the inflected and the 
 uninflected form should be more highly specialized. The loss in 
 definiteness under the old system of two overlapping uses was 
 gradually repaired by a process of adjustment in the language itself. 
 Forms like we biddas, gie stondas, hia cymes, haldas hia are re- 
 placed by we bid, ge stond, pai cum, hald pal, the beginnings of 
 which process are seen in the we behalda usig and the habba we of 
 the Early Northern. The uninflected form gradually became 
 associated with a personal pronoun-subject in direct contact with 
 the verb and, this having once been consciously felt, its use was 
 extended to all such cases to the exclusion of the form in -s. The 
 presence of the pronoun was felt to be a sufficiently clear exponent 
 of the form of the verb without the need of a distinct suffix. 
 
 Therefore the ending -s is no longer used regardless of the nature 
 of the subject, although its range is still much wider than that of 
 the uninflected form. It is used with every kind of subject except 
 a personal pronoun in close contact with the verb, which the 
 differentiating process had assigned to the uninflected plural. The 
 
 61 
 
62 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 latter, namely the uninfleeted form, has therefore entered in a fuller 
 measure upon its inheritance, a partial possession of which it had 
 already obtained in the days of the Ritual and the Gospels. Its 
 personality has become so enlarged that the sphere of its influence 
 may now reach out over any non-substantival word that may 
 intervene between the verb and its personal pronominal subject 
 an advance on the immediate contact demanded in Early Northern. 
 
 As has just been indicated, the nature of the intervening word, 
 or words, is the all-important factor in determining the inflection 
 of the verb. If this intervening element is a modifier of the 
 predicate, the uninfleeted form is used. If it is introduced to 
 explain or qualify the personal pronominal subject, its stronger 
 personality dominates that of the pronoun and the inflected form is 
 required. This distinction is illustrated by Dunbar in the poem 
 beginning We Lordis hes chosin but elsewhere he writes ge so blist 
 call] also by We twa resemblis, Ratis Raving, 35 but As thai defalt 
 makj 375. For this reason ye your self entris, Luke xi, 52 is to be 
 preferred to we our self haue herde, Luke xxn, 71. Very rarely 
 there occurs a justifiable use of the inflected form even though the 
 verb is the next word after the personal pronoun-subject. This 
 may happen when the subject-pronoun is at the end of a verse and 
 the verb is the first word in the next succeeding verse, as that yhit 
 we I Callys hyr natyvyte, Wyntoun, vn, 2880, where a pause sepa- 
 rates the subject from the predicate. 
 
 How great may be the distance between the pronominal subject 
 and the uninfleeted verb, in case the intervening words are parts of 
 the predicate, varies with different authors and even at different 
 times in the same author. For example, in the Lay Folks' Cate- 
 chism, there occurs we sklaundir or backbite but we gete or tas. There 
 is, however, a general tendency among Northern writers to use the 
 inflected form if two or more words separate the verb from its 
 subject. This tendency is sometimes counteracted by the require- 
 ments of the rime, which may cause a verb to assume the unin- 
 fleeted form although the personal pronominal subject is remote 
 from the predicate. The requirements of the rime may also cause 
 the use of the uninfleeted form with a noun, an adjective, or a 
 relative pronoun, but this is much less frequent than in the case of 
 a personal pronoun-subject. The fact that poetic license allows 
 
Middle English Inflections of ike Present Indicative Plural. 63 
 
 uninflected forms in the rime in constructions that demand the full 
 form elsewhere shows the danger incurred by those who attempt to 
 infer the current speech-usage from the rime-words alone. When 
 it is remembered that formal poetry often preserves archaic types 
 and modes of expression not found in contemporary prose, such 
 inferences must be considered hazardous unless reinforced by con- 
 clusions drawn from the usage of prose or from the language of 
 popular poetry. 
 
 When two singular nouns or a noun and a singular pronoun are 
 used conjointly as subject, it is frequently impossible to tell by the 
 form of the verb whether it is meant to be singular or plural. 
 The old usage allowing such subjects to be taken distributively 
 with a singular verb frequently affords a ready explanation, as 
 Baith my self and my hors is reddy, Rauf Coilyear, 58. This 
 explanation, however, could not be given to account for Baith the 
 King and the Queue meitis, 250, where the verb implies the idea of 
 plurality, or at least of reciprocal relation involving plurality, on 
 the part of the subject. The form of the verb may be either sin- 
 gular or plural in For thou and sir John, pi sun, has kast me in care, 
 Minot, ix, 60. The insertion of a word in apposition is sufficient 
 to cause the use of the inflected form in For my Gaist and I baith 
 cheueris, Rauf Coilyear, 96, which intervening word is however 
 dispensed with in Saynt Steuen and I ligges euyn mete, Legends, vi, 
 275. Quite abnormal is the uninflected form in lie and his menge 
 ha ihoght, Ywain and Gawain, 1215. 
 
 Because of the regular use of the s-ending in the second and 
 third singular and its frequent employment with all the persons of 
 the plural, it was analogically carried over into the first singular 
 when the pronominal subject was at a distance from its predicate, 
 as / with my worde hase wrothe, York Plays, n, 80 ; I knaw, Bot 
 keipis, Robene and Makyne, 11. The tendency to employ -s as an 
 ' absolute ' inflection for either singular or plural was the cause of 
 the frequent use of is and was with any plural subject except 
 a personal pronoun in contact with the verb. As the examples 
 show, this usage was not confined to expletive constructions but 
 was employed irrespective of the order of subject and predicate. 
 
 From the earliest times, the curtailed form with a postpositive 
 pronominal subject could co-ordinate in the imperative with the full 
 
64 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 form used unconditionally, as ncelle gie gedoema cefter onsione ah 
 sopfcest dom gedwmaf, John vii, 24 ; but the use of the curtailed form 
 in the imperative was never as general in Old Northumbian as in 
 classic West-Saxon. The co-ordination of the unconditioned form 
 in -s with the uninflected form used with a postpositive pronoun 
 is a common occurrence in Middle Northern : Rises up, he said, and 
 fle gee sone, Cursor Mundi, 2813, and Mi gestes late gee Hue in pees, 
 For scam ne dos pam na males, 2794 ; also Singes til oure God, 
 singe yhe, Surtees Psalter, XLVII, 7. To the number of these unin- 
 flected imperatives before a postpositive subject-pronoun must be 
 added those plurals that were curtailed before a postpositive reflexive 
 object, a procedure due to the tact that an object-pronoun used 
 without a pronominal subject was as clear an exponent of the form 
 of the verb as a subject-pronoun used without a pronominal object, 
 as Avise yow wele, Ywain and Gawain, 1511 ; holde you, York Plays, 
 n, 29 ; mayke yow, iv, 55. The number of uninflected forms was 
 further increased in Middle Northern by the use of the curtailed 
 plural without a postpositive pronominal subject 1 or object, pro- 
 vided that the omission of the pronoun was supplied by a contigu- 
 ous personal pronoun used as the subject of a dependent verb, as 
 Luke ge cum, Ywain and Gawain, 1514; Looke that ge do, York 
 Plays, iv, 80 ; and perhaps the extreme case Dwell here yf that ye 
 canne, iv, 29. Since the subject of such a dependent verb was 
 rarely in immediate contact with the main imperative, the use of 
 the uninflected form here was probably influenced by the optatives, 
 which were uninflected in all constructions and which were used as 
 adhortatives and imperatives in the first and third persons. This 
 would explain Lokpai alle be tain, Cursor Mundi, 4896. 
 
 In the Scottish of Wyntoun all these principles are operative : 
 Luk that yhe be / Mery and glayd, and hawys na dowt, vm, 3598 ; 
 but a freer use of the uninflected form is seen in yhe supprys . . . 
 Off kyndnes tharefor sett yhoure thoucht / And thynk for yhowe, IV, 
 881. The uninflected form takes the place of the unconditioned 
 full form in -s in Thynk, Lordys, on Dawy and hys myldness, vn, 
 1222. The interchange of inflected and uninflected forms, when 
 
 1 From the consideration of the indicative, it has been seen that the principle 
 that applies to the curtailed form when the personal pronoun is postpositive also 
 holds in Middle Northern when it is prepositive as well. 
 
Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 65 
 
 not conditioned by a pronoun, is seen to the best advantage in 
 " Cum on falowis, be foremast ay" A pryncis word off honeste 
 " Gais on, gais on," suld nevyr be, ix, 3200. 
 
 After the loss of final -e, the curtailed imperative plural of most 
 strong verbs and of all long-stemmed -Jan-verbs assumed the same 
 form as the imperative singular, and, when the subject-pronoun 
 and the name of the object addressed were omitted, could not be dis- 
 tinguished from it. Because of this fact, the interchange of the 
 uninflected with the inflected form of the plural when the subject- 
 pronoun is unexpressed may be erroneously regarded as the inter- 
 change of the imperative singular and plural in the same speech. 1 
 
 The uninflected form in unconditioned constructions gradually 
 prevailed over the inflected plural of the Middle Northern impera- 
 tive until, by the close of the fifteenth century, the use of the latter 
 had become extremely rare. In Henryson and Dunbar, the unin- 
 flected plural is almost invariably used, although the Chaucerian 
 -th occasionally presents itself. Douglas, who likes to preserve the 
 archaic s-plural, betrays his lack of appreciation for its significance 
 by using it in the singular. During this period there is a tendency 
 to use the -s with the first imperative plural in a series of two or 
 more and to omit it with the others. The sporadic cases of its use 
 in the sixteenth century and afterwards are merely revivals of an 
 old form that had become obsolete. 
 
 On the contrary, the s-plural of the indicative, while diminished 
 
 1 The use of the uninflected plural without a pronoun was instrumental in 
 bringing about an apparent interchange of the singular and plural imperative in 
 Chaucer. The ambiguity of Ten Brink's language ($ 189) in treating the cur- 
 tailed forms of the plural is misleading. And G. L. Kittredge in discussing this 
 point ( Observ. on the Lang, of Chaucer's Troilus, $ 118) regards these uninflected 
 forms in the plural as borrowings from the singular : ' Forms in -e (apocopated) 
 or without ending also occur, and some of these may be due to an extension of 
 the singular form to the plural or to the petrifaction of a singular in an idiomatic 
 use. Cf. especially lat in the periphrasis lot us with infinitive (latteth is altogether 
 unknown to Chaucer):' The phrase lat, us cited by Professor Kittredge, although 
 an imperative in form, really represents the old adhortatival optative in -en 
 which we find curtailed to -e with a postpositive subject-pronoun as early as 
 Alfred, and with a postpositive object-pronoun in the Ancren Riwle. From this 
 viewpoint the Chaucerian lat us is perhaps better explained as the curtailment of 
 an original plural than as ' the petrifaction of a singular in an idiomatic use,' as 
 Professor Kittredge suggests. 
 
 6 
 
66 Middle English Inflections of the Present Indicative Plural. 
 
 in number by the frequent substitution of plurals in -n or -th by 
 the Scottish Chaucerians, never lost its vitality. Contemporaneous 
 with the school of Chaucer, -s is the only form of the uncon- 
 ditioned plural in popular speech and popular literature. Although 
 in the more formal literature of the later Scottish the Midland 
 uninflected plural prevails, and although the Scottish already pos- 
 sessed an uninflected plural used in the vicinage of a personal 
 pronominal subject, so great was the vitality of the -s that it suc- 
 cessfully withstood the tendency to supplant it and remains to the 
 present day the unconditioned inflection of the indicative plural in 
 the folk-speech of Scotland. 
 
VITA. 
 
 I was born near Cedarville, Warren county, Virginia, May 29, 
 1875, and was educated first in public and private schools in Loudoun 
 county and later at Koanoke College. After a four years' course at 
 this institution, I was graduated in 1895 with the degree of A. B. 
 The next year I was principal of a graded school in Loudoun county 
 and in the summer of 1896 I took a course in physical training at the 
 University of Virginia. In September, 1896, I returned to Roanoke 
 College as instructor in English and physical director, which position 
 I retained four years. During the session of 1897-8 I fulfilled the 
 requirements for the degree of A. M. 
 
 In the summer of 1900 I went abroad and became a student of 
 English, German, Old Norse, and Old French at the University of 
 Berlin, under the direction of Professors Brandl, Eric Schmidt, 
 Weinhold, Heusler, and Schultz-Gora. After studying two semesters 
 in Berlin, I returned to America in the summer of 1901 and, in the 
 following October, entered the Johns Hopkins University as a student 
 of English, German, and French, under the direction of Professors 
 Bright, Browne, Wood, Vos, Armstrong, and Ogden. 
 
 To all of my instructors I desire to express my deepfelt gratitude, 
 but especially to Professor Brandl, whose enthusiasm has proved a 
 source of constant inspiration, and to Professor Bright, whose generous 
 advice and just criticism have made this dissertation possible. 
 
LOAN DEPT. 
 
 ^^^^ b 
 
 Ke^ed^^subiectto^edia^ecaU. 
 
 INTER LIBRARY 
 
 -'^ ~ 
 
 LD 2lA-50m-3,'62 
 (C7097slO)476B 
 
 General Library 
 University of California 
 
 Berkeley 
 
VC 01363