d for a long time past, to the getting quit of these, and to
the satisfying of itself with an adjectival apposition of the
substantive in their stead.

{Sidenote: _Weak and Strong Praeterites_}

Let me illustrate by another example the way in which a language, as it
travels onward, simplifies itself, approaches more and more to a
grammatical and logical uniformity, seeks to do the same thing always in
the same manner; where it has two or three ways of conducting a single
operation, lets all of them go but one; and thus becomes, no doubt,
easier to be mastered, more handy, more manageable; for its very riches
were to many an embarrassment and a perplexity; but at the same time
imposes limits and restraints on its own freedom of action, and is in
danger of forfeiting elements of strength, variety and beauty, which it
once possessed. I refer to the tendency of our verbs to let go their
strong praeterites, and to substitute weak ones in their room; or,
where they have two or three praeterites, to retain only one of them,
and that invariably the weak one. Though many of us no doubt are
familiar with the terms 'strong' and 'weak' praeterites, which in all
our better grammars have put out of use the wholly misleading terms,
'irregular' and 'regular', I may perhaps as well remind you of the exact
meaning of the terms. A strong praeterite is one formed by an internal
vowel change; for instance the verb 'to _drive_' forms the praeterite
'_drove_' by an internal change of the vowel 'i' into 'o'. But why, it
may be asked, called 'strong'? In respect of the vigour and indwelling
energy in the word, enabling it to form its past tense from its own
resources, and with no calling in of help from without. On the other
hand 'lift' forms its praeterite 'lift_ed_', not by any internal change,
but by the addition of 'ed'; 'grieve' in like manner has 'griev_ed_'.
Here are weak tenses; as strength was ascribed to the other verbs, so
weakness to these, which can form their praeterites only by external aid
and addition. You will see at once that these strong praeterites, while
they witness to a vital energy in the words which are able to put them
forth, do also, as must be allowed by all, contribute much to the
variety and charm of a language{191}.

The point, however, which I am urging now is this,--that these are
becoming fewer every day; multitudes of them having disappeared, while
others are in the act of disappearing. Nor is the balance r