tive: one and other are also capable of forming the plurals ones,

others.

1. one, Anglosaxon ân, properly the numeral, is used substantively; its use as an indeterminate pronoun is of great extent only in Modern-English. Anglosaxon certainly weakened ân down to aliquis, quidam, but more in the sense of the present article, and used ân ân substantively in the meaning of unus alter. Old-English likewise often opposed that oon and that othur to each other. Compare CHAUCER 1015. Unus quisque, unus ex multis was in Anglosaxon mostly denoted by man (home). The Plural ones, as in: And voices of the loved ones gone before (BRYANT) is wanting in Anglosaxon; but a plural is found in the Old-English: Herkneth, felaws, we thre ben al oones (CHAUCER 14111.); but on the other hand there stands: Bothe in oon armes (CHAUCER 1014.); where Old-French would have put unes armes. 2. none, no, Anglosaxon nân, næn = ne ân, non unus, Old-English non, none, no, substantively and adjectively even in Anglosaxon as well as in English, is the same in the plural as in the singular: None there, said he, are welcome (WALPOLE). At present none stands substantively or adjectively without a substantive after it: None but the brave deserves the fair (DRYDEN). None of their productions are extant (BLAIR); also none other: Achieving what none other can (LONGFELLOW). Other hope had she none (LONGFELLOW). And save his good broad-sword, he weapon had none (W. SCOTT). On the other hand no stands attributively with a substantive after it: She had no bonnet on her head (DICKENS). Old-English also put non, none attributively before words beginning with a vowel or an h, else commonly no: Sche dothe non harm to no man (MAUNDEV. p. 23.). They have non houses (p. 63.). I am non other than thou seest now (p. 25.); yet also none so foule synfulle men (p. 62.). None erthly thing (TOWNEL. MYST. p. 66.). None excusing (p. 78.); so even in Skelton: None excesse; none other shyfte; but no faute (I. 272.).

No one is pleonastic, in which one appears twice, unless we would take no for the Anglosaxon nâ, nô, nunquam. Of the compounds nobody, nothing, the latter is the elder: I herd no thing, ford, but goode (TOWNEL. MYST. p. 69.). What is better than a good woman? No thing (CHAUCER II. p. 336. Wright). For body the Old-English frequently had wight and persone: Ther is no wight that hath soverein bounté, save God alone (CHAUCER II. p. 333.). Bywreye nought youre conseil to no persone (IB. p. 338.). Wight is the Anglosaxon viht f, creatura, and is also found in the neuter nought (nâviht). Body, denoting the person, occurs moreover often in another union, as my body. Compare the OldFrench mon cors.

3. aught, ought and naught, nought, Anglosaxon â-viht, âuht, âht and nâ-viht, nâught, nâht, Old-English aught, auht, oght, ought and naught, noght &c., which we are now advised to spell aught and nought (to distinguish them from the verbal form ought), have been preserved down to the most modern times, and also take a (neuter) adjective after them: But should ought impious or

Take friendships name, reject and shun it (T. H. BAYLY). Now it else have we to give (LONGFELLOW), like something, nothing: Our ancesters Land achieved nothing considerable by land against fireigu enemies (MACAULAY).

4. kome, Anglosaxon sum, aliquis, quidam, Old-English sum, som, is ased adjectively and substantively, although the latter only in the plura, whereas in the singular the prose is denoted by some öze &c.: Some one comes! (LONGFELLOW). In the Anglosaxon on the other hand the singular was also used, especially in the redup Scation sumsum for alius — alius, alius alter. Moreover it remains unchanged in the singular and plural: some bread; some people; a persons WEBST.). Some other give me thanks (SEAKS FARE Com. of Err. 4. 3.). Some slight advantages (MaCATLAY). Sme of these moves were hazardous (ID.). Some thought that Dunkirk, some that Ypres was his object (ID.). The OldEnglish discriminates, as especially Piers Ploughman, the plural somme from the singular som. Some is also united with cardical numbers, in order to denote the number as inexact, like the Latin aliqui: Have you long sojourn'd there?" Some sixteen months (SHAKSP. Two Gentlem. &c.). Is he within some ten or ficenty leagues Or fifty? (WALPOLE). Some fire hours hence . we may meet &c. (J. HUGHES). So even the Anglosaxon sume tên gear, circiter decem annos. Familiar combinations of some are some one (see above), somebody, something, and in the latter sense also some chat. Som thing is also familiar to the OldEnglish (see 2.); and som what also occurs: Ther nys no creature so good, that him ne wantith som what of the perfeccioun of God (CHAUCER II. p. 333.). The Modern-English somewhat still contains the hva, hvät, aliquis, aliquid, appearing in Anglosaxon as an indeterminate pronoun, which in Old-English, occurs only in the neuter: But wite ye what? (CHAUCER 10305.). Ne elles what = nor any thing else (ID. House of Fame 3, 651.); Anglosaxon elles hvat. The what partly, used now as well as in Old-English adverbially is the accusative of this neuter. 5. enough, enow, Anglosaxon genôh, adject. and adverb, Old-English ynough, ynow, enow &c., dialectically frequently enow, is used adjectively and substantively as well as adverbially. The collateral form enow, contrary to the nature of the thing and the older linguistic usage, has, strange to say, passed among grammarians for the plural of enough, and authors have frequently conformed to this arbitrary distinction. Still stranger is the assumption that enow does not stand after a substantive: Have I not cares enow, and pangs enow (L. BYRON). We' re enough already (ID.). Enough of danger (W. SCOTT). Enough, alas! in humble homes remain, To meditate 'gainst friends the secret blow (L. BYRON). 6. few, Anglosaxon feáve, Plural of feá, paucus, Old-English fewe. The article often placed before the few is explained like the a standing before cardinal numbers (see p. 278.). His wants were few (L. BYRON). There are but few that can do that (GOLDSMITH). He.. was sent thence to Huy, where he passed a few

=

days in luxurious repose (MACAULAY). Compare the Old-English: A fewe of youre frendes (CHAUCER II. p. 340.). Dialectically few is often treated as a singular: a few broth, a few pottage &c.; else it is hardly referred to the singular, as perhaps in: While yet our race was few (BRYANT).

The Old-English fele, Anglosaxon fela, indecl., multus, opposed to fewe (By dayes fele [CHAUCER 8793.]. Of fele colours [PIERS PLOUGHм. P 222.]), is replaced by many: Few, few shall part where many meet (CAMPBELL).

=

7. any ullus, Anglosaxon ânig, ænig, from ân, Old-English ony, any, eny, is, as in Anglosaxon, an adjective, but is sometimes used substantively: Who is here so vile..? If any, speak (SHAKSP. J. C.). It is a like both in the singular and the plural: Hath Page any brains! hath he any eyes? hath he any thinking? (SHAKSP. M. Wives). Such a collection .. as you will scarcely find in any ten cabinets in Europe (LADY MONTAGUE). OldEnglish has preserved many traces of a plural form: Anye rentes: anye riche frendes (PIERS PLOUGHм. p. 305.). The person is readily denoted by any one (I did not speak any one that day (LONGFELLOW) and anybody; Old-English any wight (CHAUCER II. p. 338.); eny persone (IB.); whereas the notion of a thing is expressed by any thing.

8. many, Anglosaxon maneg, moneg, multus, Old-English many, mony, used substantively of persons in the plural, as in Anglosaxon. În the singular it assumes a before substantives: many a flower, many a day &c.; referred to persons also a one: many a one (M'. CULLOCH p. 138.); compare many an oon (JACK JUGL. p. 9.). Many one in the 3, 2. Psalm is construed collectively with the plural of the verb. This many one was also referred to substantives of things: Tel us a tale, for thou canst many oon (CHAUCER 13734.). Ensamples many oon (13850.), if it followed the substantive. The substantive a many, now commonly a great many, is the Anglosaxon substantive menigëo, menigo. The plural stands adjectively and substantively: many long cruel, and bloody wars (W. SCOTT). Few shall part where many meet (CAMPBELL). In Old-English the e of the plural (Anglosaxon manege) still often comes out: Manye bokes (PIERS PLOUGHM. p. 199.). So manye maistres (p. 321.). Ther seighen it manye (p. 337.); although also: many longe yeres (p. 312.). A genitive is also formed therefrom: That book in many's eyes does share the glory, That in gold clasps locks in thy golden story (SHAKSP. Rom. and Jul.). The opinion according to which many is taken to be the plural of much and more passes as the comparative of many, is devoid of etymological foundation.

9. each, every single one of a total number, Anglosaxon ælc (= â-lîc), quisque, unusquisque, Old-English ilk, eche, ich, stands both connected and disconnected, and is by its nature singular. It always has a distributive relation to a preceding or succeeding substantive or pronoun, where it does not attributively precede its substantive: Only eight thousand copies were printed, much less

than one to each parish in the kingdom (MACAULAY). And isles and whirlpools in the stream appear Each after each (BRYANT). Come, good people, all and each (LONGFELLOW). Three different nations, who where enemies to each other (W. SCOTT). Of persons and things we still use each one: There are two angels, that attend unseen Each one of us (LONGFELLOW). The pages of thy book I read, And as I closed each one, My heart, responding, ever said "Servant of God! well done!" (ID.). In Old-English echoon, ichon, ilkon, ilkane, ilka (= ilk a) is very common; ilkan is still in use in Yorkshire and Northumberland, elcone in Cumberland. The fuller forms stand absolutely before persons or after a substantive of a thing, the weakened ones ich a, ilk a before substantives: each a persone (PIERS PLOUGHм. p. 298.); ilk a stede (TOWNEL. MYST. p. 68.).

10. every, a compound of each, which is generalized in an indeterminate manner by ever, unknown to Anglosaxon (= æfre, æfer

ælc), Old-English everilk, everich, is now mostly used attributively: Every Colonel, every Lieutenant Colonel, was killed or severely wounded (MACAULAY). Rarely, and that mostly in the legal style, it stands disconnectedly, with of after it: all and every of them; every of the clauses. In Ŏld-English, where it is referred to one of many, as also of two, which is still the case at present, it also stands absolutely of persons: That every schuld an hundred knightes bryng (CHAUCER 2098.). Everich in otheres hond his trouthe laith (6986.). The person is commonly periphrased by every one, every body, the neuter notion by every thing; to Old-English everich on, everychone, every wight, every thing are familiar. Modern-English has also the union every each every other, alternate (HALLIWELL s. v.).

=

11. either, each of two, and one of two, even every, the second of which meanings, contrary to the very usage of the language itself, is maintained in modern times as the sole correct one, Anglosaxon ægðer

On

æghväder, that is, â-ge-hväder, alongside of âhvhäder, uterque and alteruter, unusquisque, Old-English either, aither, ather (OldScottish, North-English), stands attributively and disconnectedly. With the meaning uterque, which is very common in Old-English, it not rarely stands in Modern-English also: The king of Israel and Jehosaphat sat either of them on his throne (2 CHRON. 18, 9.). Either of these distinguished officers (Catinat and Boufflers) would have been a successor worthy of Luxemburg (MACAULAY). either side of him there shot up.. houses (DICKENS). Old-English: Enemyes and frendes Love his eyther oother (PIERS PLOUGHM. p. 212). Either is otheres joie (p. 343.). Of course the meanings uterque and alteruter often border on each other, the latter whereof needs no exemplification. The Old-English genitive in s(es) is also found in Modern-English: They are both in eithers powers (SHAKSP. Temp.); compare the Old-English: Till eitheres (utriusque) wille wexeth keene (PIERS PLOUGHM. p. 267.). The relation to several, with the meaning of each (of any multitude) instances of which are given in Wagner's Grammar, published by Herrig p. 293., may be justified out of the Anglosaxon.

12. neither, Anglosaxon nâhväder, nâder, neuter, Old-English neither, nather &c., is, analogously to either, employed connectedly and disconnectedly: On neither side was there a wish to bring the question of right to issue (MACAULAY). They're both of nature mild.. Neither has any thing he calls his own (OTWAY).

13. other, alius and alter, Anglosaxon ôder, alius, alter and secundus, Old-norse annar, Gothic anpar, Old-Highdutch andar, Old-English other, alongside whereof andyr, ender, endir (HALLIWELL S. v.), stands both connectedly and disconnectedly, may have the articles a (an) and the before it, and, when used substantively, assumes the s of the genitive and of the plural: Some are happy while others are miserable (MURRAY). Old-English inflects it, but has the e in the plural a long time: Either is otheres joie (PIERS PLOUGHM. p. 343.). Ac per bep to fore alle opere pre (Rob. oF GLOUCESTER İ. 2.). Be the Cristene or othere (MAUNDEV. p. 74.). The plural subsequently stands without s: Whan other are glad Than is he sad (SKELTON I. 79.). Some other give me thanks (SHAKSP. Com. of Err. 4, 3.); thus in the union some other some (ACT. XVII. 18). Compare DIALECT. OF CRAVEN S. V. Where one of two is opposed to the other in reciprocal activity, we find one another, where one of two or several is denoted, each other has its place: The parson and the stranger shook one another very lovingly by the hand (FIELDING). The reader may perhaps wonder, that so fond a pair should. . never converse with one another (ID.). Two blackbirds answered each other from opposite sides (GOLDSMITH). Three different nations, who were enemies to each other (W. SCOTT). The meaning of the other as a second of the same sort still has place: We need another Hildebrand (LONGFELLOW). Here was a Caesar; When comes such another? (SHAKSP. Jul. Caes.) Old-English often swiche another; syke another (SKELTON I. 260.). Thus also the next in succession is determined as a second: Four happy days bring in Another moon (SHAKSP. Mids. N. Dr.). You have been deeply wrong'd, and now shall be Nobly avenged before another night (L. BYRON); and on the other hand the recently passed is denoted by other: the other day, compare the French l'autre jour. In the connection other than it corresponds to the French autre que, different from.

14. such, Anglosaxon svylc, talis, Old - English swich, swylk, suilk, selk, slik &c., also for idem, (see p. 294.), stands attributively, predicatively and substantively, and has, as an adjective, also a after it: Such was the general &c. (MACAULAY). Such curiosity William could not endure (ID.). Cutts was the only man who appeared to consider such an expedition as a party of pleasure (ID.). The plural is the same as the singular; Old-English has the plural in e: Selke (DAME SIRIZ p. 5.). They are not swylke als they seme (Ms. in HALLIWELL s. v.). By alle swiche preestes (PIERS PLOUGHм. p. 220.). Swiche wise wordes (p. 19.). The connection such a one is frequent, in Modern-English often equivalent to the French un tel, tel et tel, whereby we indicate the person whose more particular description we cannot or will not