only preliminary to the consideration of what are called the positive, comparative, and superlative degrees of adjectives and adverbs. A distinction, important elsewhere, is pre-eminently important here. This is the distinction between a sequence in logic and a sequence in etymology. The ideas or notions of thou, thy, thee, are ideas between which there is a metaphysical or logical connection. The train of such ideas may be said to form a sequence, and such a sequence may be called a logical one. The forms thou, thy, thee, are forms or words between which there is a formal or an etymological connection. A train of such words may be called a sequence, and such a sequence may be called an etymological one. In the case of thou, thy, thee, the etymological sequence tallies with the logical one. In the case of I, my, me, the etymological sequence does not tally (or tallies imperfectly) with the logical one. Applying this to words like good, better, &c., we see, at once, that, whilst some are deficient in their Comparative and Superlative, others are deficient in their Positive, forms. The defective character, however, of this class of words is not all. It must be remarked that the forms which one word wants are made good by those which another possesses. Hence, there is not only defect, but what may be called complement also. The word good fills up what was wanting to the forms better and best. That the phenomena of defect and complement will meet us again when we reach the pronouns is suggested by the example just given. It will meet us elsewhere besides. It will meet us most especially amongst the verbs. CHAPTER X. FORMATION OF THE COMPARATIVE DEGREE. -DETAILS. § 326. THE comparative is formed from the positive by adding -er; as cold, rich, dry-cold-er, rich-er, dry-er. This -r was, originally, -s. (See § 330.) § 327. Details.--In worse we may suppose that there is a remnant of this: the Moso-Gothic form being váirsiza; in Old High-German, wirsiro; Middle High-German, wirser; Old Saxon, wirso; Anglo-Saxon, vyrsa; Old Norse, vërri; Danish, værre; and Swedish, värre. Near, nearer.-A. S. neah; comparative, nearre, near, nyr; superlative, nyhst, nehst. Observe, the absence of the r. This shows that the English positive near is the Anglo-Saxon comparative nearre, and that in the secondary comparative nearer, we have an excess of expression. In the vulgarism betterer for better, and in the antiquated forms worser for worse, and lesser for less, we have an excess of expression. In the Old High-German we have the forms betsëróro, méróro, érërëra better, more, ere. It may be, however, that the r in near is a mere point of orthography, and that it is not pronounced; just as father and farther are, for the most part, pronounced alike. = Farther.-Anglo-Saxon, feor, fyrre, fyrrest. The th seems euphonic, inserted by the same process that gives the din ἄνδρος. Further.-Confounded with farther, although in reality from a different word, fore. Old High-German, furdir; New High-German, der vordere; Anglo-Saxon, fyrɣre. CHAPTER XI. FORMATION OF THE SUPERLATIVE DEGREE.-DETAILS. § 328. THE superlative degree is formed from the positive by the addition of the syllable -est; as dark, dark-est ; cold, cold-est; rich, rich-est; dry, dry-est; low, low-est. § 329. But it may also be formed from the comparative by changing the r of the comparative into s, and adding t; as dark-er, dark-es, dark-es-t; cold-er, cold-es, cold-es-t; rich-er, rich-es, rich-es-t; dry-er, dry-es, dry-es-t; low-er, low-es, low-es-t. 330. To understand the reason why this complex and apparently unnecessary process has been noticed, we must remember what has been said concerning the Moeso-Gothic language, and the extent to which it preserves the older forms of the Gothic inflections; and, also, that the Maso-Gothic Comparative was not formed in r, but in s. Ald-iza, bat-iza, sut-iza, were the original forms of what became in Old High-German alt-iro, betsiro, suats-iro, and in English, old-er, bett-er, sweet-er. This is one fact. Another is, that whilst many languages have a Comparative without a Superlative degree, few or none have a Superlative without a Comparative. Hence, in the case of a Superlative in -st, two views may be taken. According to the one, it is the Positive with the addition of st; according to the other, it is the old Comparative in -s with the addition only of t. Now, Grimm, and others, lay down as a rule, that the Superlative is formed, not directly from the Positive, but indirectly through the Comparative. § 331. With the exception of worse and less, all the English Comparatives end in r; yet no Superlative ends in rt, the form being, not wise, wiser, wisert, but wise, wiser, wisest. This fact, without invalidating the notion just laid down, gives additional importance to the Comparative forms in s; since it is from these, before they changed to r, that we must suppose the Superlatives to have been derived. This theory being admitted, we can, by approximation, determine the date of the Superlative degree. It was introduced into the languages allied to the English, after the establishment of the Comparative and before the change of s into r. § 332. Of the English superlatives, the only ones that demand a detailed examination, are those that are generally despatched without difficulty, viz. the words in most such as midmost, foremost, &c. The current view is that they are compound words, formed from simple ones, by the addition of the superlative term most. Grimm's view is opposed to this. In appreciating this, we must bear in mind the phenomena of excess of expression; at the same time we must not depart from the current theory without duly considering that we have in Icelandic the forms nærmeir, fjærmeir, &c., nearer and farther, most unequivocally compounded of near+more and of far+ The A. S. gives us the following forms: more. Besides these, there are in the other allied languages, words like fruma=first, aftuma=last, miduma=middle. These words show at once, that, as far as they are con-. cerned, the m which appears in the last syllable of each has nothing to do with the word most. On the contrary, there was formed, in Anglo-Saxon, a regular superlative from them by the addition of st; as æfte-m-est, fyr-m-est, læte-m-est, sið-m-est, yfe-m-est, ute-m-est. And, hence, in the present English, the different parts of the syllable most (in words like upmost), come from different quarters. The m is the m in the Anglo-Saxon words innema, &c.; whilst the -st is the common sign of the superlative. In separating, then, such words as midmost into its component parts, we should write § 333. In certain words the syllable m-ost is added to a word already ending in er; that is, to a word already marked with the sign of the comparative degree. neth-er-most upp-er-most hind-er-most. out-er-most. inn-er-most. Here, the addition is most, as a simple word; and the result is a Compound-not a Derivative. Having accounted for the m in the words just mentioned, we can account for the m in the word former. The superlative was forma; and former was a comparative, catachrestically, derived from it. CHAPTER XII. COMPARISON OF ADVERBS. § 334. Comparison of Adverbs.—Adverbs, like adjectives, take degrees of comparison, though not to the same extent. In the sun shines bright, the word bright means brightly; and although the use of the latter word would |