perfect specimen,' we are evidently employing the words empty and perfect in an inexact sense.

(ii) The adjective may denote the presence of a quality which does not vary in its amount: e.g. wooden, circular, monthly, English.

113. Formation of Comparatives and Superlatives. There are two ways of forming the degrees of comparison:

1. Add to the Positive -er to form the comparative and -est to form the superlative, in the case of all words of one syllable and some words of two syllables, especially those in -er, -le, -y, as clever, able, merry.

2. Use the adverbs more, most before the Positive.

The substitution of more and most for the inflexional forms -er and -est began through Norman French influence, but has been extended during the last two centuries on the grounds of euphony. Such forms as honourablest, ancienter, virtuousest, are not only disagreeable to the ear but also awkward to pronounce.

Notice the following changes of spelling when the inflexions marking comparison are added:

i. If the positive ends in -e, cut off the -e: e.g. grav-er, larg-er.

ii. If in y, change the y to i if a consonant precedes, as drier, merrier, but retain the y if a vowel precedes, as gayer, greyer. (This is similar to the rule determining the spelling of plurals of nouns in -y.) Note that the adjective shy keeps the y.

iii. Monosyllabic words ending in a consonant preceded by a short vowel double the consonant to show that the vowel is short: hotter, thinner, redder. A few other adjectives, not monosyllabic, exhibit the same orthographical change: crueller, hopefuller.

114. The following comparisons are irregular, that is to say, they do not conform to the general rules stated above; in many instances deficiencies have been supplied by borrowing words from other adjectives: defect is one kind of irregularity.

The positive forms in brackets are adverbs: corresponding adjectives exist only in the comparative and superlative.

115. Remarks on the Irregular Comparative Forms.

Better comes from a root which we have in the words bootless, meaning 'of no good'; booty; to boot, meaning 'to the good.' Best= bet-est.

Worse comes from the Old Eng. weor, 'bad,' with the comparative in -s instead of -r, weor-se for weor-er. Or worse may be itself a positive, in which case the right comparative would be worser, which still

occurs.

Less, least are from las, meaning 'weak,' in Old Eng. These forms do not come from little.

More occurs abridged as moe in Elizabethan writers.

Near is really the comparative of nigh: the r is the sign of comparison: so nearer is a double comparative. In Old Eng. the positive was neah.

Last is from latest, as best from betest. We use latter and last of order in a series, later and latest of time.

Elder, eldest show a modification of the vowel of the positive which is common in German comparative forms. With reference to the double set of forms, elder, eldest, older, oldest, observe that (1) elder is no longer used to express comparison with than: we cannot say 'He is elder than his brother': (2) the use of elder is restricted to persons: we cannot say 'This is the elder of the two horses :' (3) elder can be used as a substantive, ‘Respect your elders:' older is always an adjective.

Rathe as a positive adjective meant 'early.' Milton speaks of 'the rathe primrose.' We preserve only the comparative rather, which we use as an adverb: 'I would rather go'=I would sooner go than not go, if I had the choice.

Hindmost, inmost, utmost, etc. These words in -most require particular attention. At first sight one would naturally suppose them to be compounds of most, as this explanation would exactly suit their meaning as superlatives. But we can trace their forms back to an earlier period of the language and satisfy ourselves that they did not arise by the combination of most and hind, most and in, etc. In Old English, several adjectives, which have comparatives and superlatives formed from adverbs, contain the letter -m- which was a superlative suffix. To this was added the superlative ending -est, making mest, which was confounded with Thus these words are really double superlatives. (But most the superlative of much is not formed in this way. It is derived from a positive root mah, meaning 'great,' by adding st.)

most.

Foremost is really a double superlative of fore, containing the two superlative inflexions -m- and -st. But the fact that the -m- represented an earlier superlative suffix was forgotten, and from forem-ost, as if it were a simple superlative, the comparative form-er was coined. Hence the word former breaks up into these elements; root fore, superlative suffix -m-, comparative suffix -er.

First represents the superlative of fore, fore-st, the vowel of the root being changed by Umlaut.

Further is a comparative of fore, formed by adding a comparative suffix ther. It was wrongly looked upon as a comparative of forth to which the regular comparative ending -er had been added, and, owing to this mistaken notion, the th was retained in the superlative furth-est.

Farther and further are used indiscriminately now, but their meanings were originally different; farther meant ‘more distant, more far away,' further, more in front, more to the fore.' Yet we see no contradiction at the present day in saying 'Stand further off,' 'He is coming farther this way.'

Hind occurs as an adjective in 'the hind quarter,' 'hind wheel.' Utter is used as a comparative in the law-courts in the phrase 'the utter bar,' in contrast with the 'inner bar.'

116. Examples of Double Comparatives are seen in nearer, lesser, worser: examples of Double Superlatives in foremost, inmost, upmost, etc. Such expressions as more better, more braver, most worst, most unkindest are frequently met with in Shakespeare and other Elizabethan writers. When we use such expressions as chiefest or most universal, we are employing adjectives which are double superlatives

in meaning though not in form. But this arises from our laxity in the choice of words: we use chief as if it meant the same as important, and universal as if it meant the same as general.

117. Superlatives are sometimes employed to denote the presence of a quality in a high degree, without any suggestion of comparison. When a mother writes to her son as 'My dearest boy,' she does not mean that his brothers occupy a lower place in her affections: 'dearest' signifies in such a case 'very dear.'

118. There are some comparative adjectives which we cannot use with than. Thus the following adjectives which have been borrowed directly from the Latin in the comparative form do not admit than after them: senior, junior, exterior, (which take to after them); major, minor, interior. The following adjectives of English origin have the same characteristic; elder, inner, outer, latter. We can say older than, later than, but not elder than, latter than.

QUESTIONS.

1. Adjectives of two syllables having certain terminations may be compared without the use of more and most. Specify three of these terminations, and mention adjectives which contain them.

2. Give the comparative and superlative degrees of sad, gay, free, nigh, bad, old, hateful, happy, out, awry, fore, late, sly, holy, far, virtuous, dry, complete, big, honourable.

3. Make sentences which illustrate the difference in our use of oldest, eldest; latest, last; nearest, next; farthest, furthest.

4. Which of the following Adjectives, when employed in their strict sense, cannot be compared?—common, universal, supreme, monthly, triangular, despotic, absolute, inevitable, unique, European, eternal, boundless.

5. Describe the origin and formation of the words first, second, eleven, thirteen, twenty, million.

118

CHAPTER XIV.

PRONOUNS.

119. A Pronoun is commonly defined as a word used instead of a noun. The definition has these merits: it is short, it is easily understood, and it calls attention to the useful service which most Pronouns perform in saving the repetition of a noun. Thus, for example, if no pronouns existed, instead of saying 'John gave Mary a watch on her birthday, and she lost it,' we should have to say 'John gave Mary a watch on Mary's birthday, and Mary lost the watch.

120. But have all pronouns this property of serving as substitutes for nouns?

A good deal of ingenuity must be exercised if we are to bring within the scope of the definition (1) the Personal Pronouns of the First and Second Persons, and (2) the Interrogative Pronouns.

(1) For if the pronouns I and you were abolished, and nouns were put in their places, we should have to recast our sentences entirely and make all our statements in the third person.

(2) Again, when we ask 'Who broke the window?' what is the noun for which we are to say that the pronoun Who serves as substitute? We must maintain that the pronoun Who here stands for the noun which the answer supplies, but this seems rather far-fetched. For suppose that the reply to the question is not 'Brown,' or 'the boy,' but I don't know,' where is the noun?