FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181  
182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   >>   >|  
dition of -d is the process by which the present form is rendered praeterite. The word _fell_ is formed from _fall_, by changing a into e. The change of vowel is the process by which the present form is rendered praeterite. Of the two processes the result is the same. In what respect do they differ? For the sake of illustration, let a new word be introduced into the language. Let a praeterite tense of it be formed. This praeterite would be formed, not by changing the vowel, but by adding -d. No _new_ verb ever takes a strong praeterite. The like takes place with nouns. No _new_ substantive would form its plural, like _oxen_ or _geese_, by adding -en, or by changing the vowel. It would rather, like _fathers_ and _horses_, add the lene sibilant. Now, the processes that change _fall_, _ox_ and _goose_ into _fell_, _oxen_, and _geese_, inasmuch as they cease to operate on the language in its present stage, are _obsolete_ processes; whilst those that change _move_ into _moved_, and _horse_ into _horses_, operating on the language in its present stage, are _vital_ processes. A definition of the word _irregular_ might be so framed as to include all words whose forms could not be accounted for by the vital processes. Such a definition would make all the strong verbs irregular. The very fact of so natural a class as that of the strong verbs being reduced to the condition of irregulars, invalidates such a definition as this. s. 327. _Processes of necessity as opposed to processes of habit._--The combinations -pd, -fd, -kd, -sd, and some others, are unpronounceable. Hence words like _step_, _quaff_, _back_, _kiss_, &c., take after them the sound of -t; _stept_, _quafft_, &c., being their praeterites, instead of _stepd_, _quaffd_. Here the change from -d to -t is a matter of necessity. It is not so with words like _weep_, and _wept_, &c. Here the change of vowel is not necessary. _Weept_ might have been said if the habit of the language had permitted. A definition of the word _irregular_ might be so framed as to include all words whose natural form was modified by any euphonic process whatever. In this case _stept_ (modified by a process of necessity), and _wept_ (modified by a process of habit), would be equally irregular. A less limited definition might account words regular as long as the process by which they are deflected from their natural form was a process of necessity. Those, however, which were modified by a
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181  
182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
process
 

processes

 

change

 
definition
 
praeterite
 
irregular
 

modified

 

necessity

 

present

 

language


strong
 
natural
 

formed

 

changing

 

horses

 

framed

 

include

 

adding

 

rendered

 

regular


Processes
 

deflected

 

equally

 
limited
 

account

 
opposed
 
combinations
 

unpronounceable

 

praeterites

 

quafft


matter

 

quaffd

 
euphonic
 
permitted
 

plural

 
substantive
 

introduced

 

result

 

dition

 

respect


illustration

 

differ

 
fathers
 

accounted

 
irregulars
 
invalidates
 

condition

 

reduced

 
operating
 

sibilant