FullReads

The formation of the plural and genitive singular is the same.

A few words still make the plural in n, as men, women, oxen, swine, and more anciently eyen, shoon. This formation is that which generally prevails in the Teutonick dialects.

Words that end in f commonly form their plural by ves, as loaf, loaves; calf, calves.

Except a few, muff, muffs; chief, chiefs. So hoof, roof, proof, relief, mischief, puff, cuff, dwarf, handkerchief, grief.

Irregular plurals are teeth from tooth, lice from louse, mice from mouse, geese from goose, feet from foot, dice from die, pence from penny, brethren from brother, children from child.

Plurals ending in s have no genitives; but we say, Womens excellencies, and Weigh the mens wits against the ladies hairs.

Dr. Willis thinks the Lords’ house may he said for the house of Lords; but such phrases are not now in use; and surely an English ear rebels against them. They would commonly produce a troublesome ambiguity, as the Lord’s house may be the house of Lords, or the house of a Lord. Besides that the mark of elision is improper, for in the Lords’ house nothing is cut off.

Some English substantives, like those of many other languages, change their termination as they express different sexes; as prince, princess; actor, actress; lion, lioness; hero, heroine. To these mentioned by Dr. Lowth may be added arbitress, poetess, chauntress, duchess, tigress, governess, tutress, peeress, authoress, traytress, and perhaps othets. Of these variable terminations we have only a sufficient number to make us feel our want; for when we say of a woman that she is a philosopher, an astronomer, a builder, a weaver, a dancer, we perceive an impropriety in the termination which we cannot avoid; but we can say that she is an architect, a botanist, a student. because these terminations have not annexed to them the notion of sex. In words which the necessities of life are often requiring, the sex is distinguished not by different terminations but by different names, as a bull, a cow; a horse, a mare; equus, equa; a cock, a hen; and sometimes by pronouns prefixed, as a he-goat, a, she-goat.

* * * * *

Of ADJECTIVES.

Adjectives in the English language are wholly indeclinable; having neither case, gender, nor number, and being added to substantives in all relations without any change; as, a good woman, good women, of a good woman; a good man, good men, of good men.

The Comparison of Adjectives.

The comparative degree of adjectives is formed by adding er, the superlative by adding est, to the positive; as, fair, fairer, fairest; lovely, lovelier, loveliest; sweet, sweeter, sweetest; low, lower, lowest; high, higher, highest.

Some words are irregularly compared; as, good, better, best; bad, worse, worst; little, less, least; near, nearer, next; much, more, most; many (for moe), more (for moer) most (for moest); late, later, latest or last.

Some comparatives form a superlative by adding, most, as nether, nethermost; outer, outermost; under, undermost; up, upper, uppermost; fore, former, foremost.

Most is sometimes added to a substantive, as, topmost, southmost.

Many adjectives do not admit of comparison by terminations, and are only compared by more and most, as, benevolent, more benevolent, most benevolent.

All adjectives may be compared by more and most, even when they have comparatives and superlatives regularly formed; as, fair, fairer, or more fair; fairest, or most fair.

In adjectives that admit a regular comparison, the comparative more is oftener used than the superlative most, as more fair is oftener written for fairer, than most fair for fairest.

The comparison of adjectives is very uncertain; and being much regulated by commodiousness of utterance, or agreeableness of sound, is not easily reduced to rules.