y, _smidhes_, _endes_, and
_daeges_; whilst the nominative plurals were, _smidhas_, _endas_, and
_daegas_.

But when a change took place, by which the vowel of the last syllable in
each word was ejected, the result was, that the forms of the genitive
singular and the nominative plural, originally different, became one and
the same; so that the identity of the two cases is an accident.

This fact relieves the English grammarian from a difficulty. The nominative
plural and the genitive singular are, in the present language of England,
identical; the apostrophe in _father's_ being a mere matter of orthography.
However, there was _once_ a difference. This modifies the previous
statement, which may now stand thus:--_for a change of case there must be a
change of form existing or presumed_.

s. 211. _The number of our cases and the extent of language over which they
spread._--In the English language there is undoubtedly a _nominative_ case.
This occurs in substantives, adjectives, and pronouns (_father_, _good_,
_he_) equally. It is found in both numbers.

s. 212. _Accusative._--Some call this the _objective_ case. The words _him_
and _them_ (whatever they may have been originally) are now (to a certain
extent) true accusatives. The accusative case is found in pronouns only.
_Thee, me, us_, and _you_ are, to a certain extent, true accusatives. These
are accusative thus far: 1. They are not derived from any other case. 2.
They are distinguished from the forms _I_, _my_, &c. 3. Their meaning is
accusative. Nevertheless, they are only imperfect accusatives. They have no
sign of case, and are distinguished by negative characters only.

One word in the present English is probably a true accusative in the strict
sense of the term, viz., the word _twain_ = _two_. The -n in _twai-n_ is
the -n in _hine_ = _him_ and _hwone_ = _whom_. This we see from the
following inflection:--

_Neut._ _Masc._ _Fem._

_N. and Acc._ Tw['a], Tw['e]gen, Tw['a].
\____ _____/
\/
_Abl. and Dat._ Tw['a]m, Twaem.
_Gen._ Twegra, Twega.

Although nominative as well as accusative, I have little doubt as to the
original character of _tw['e]gen_ being accusative. The -n is by no means
radical; besides which, it _is_ the sign of an accusative case, and is
_not_ the sign of a nominative.

s. 213. _Dative._--In the antiquated word _whilom_ (_at times_),