Verbs

Weak verbs which change their stem vowel in the past tense

ModE has a small number of weak verbs in which the past tense isn't formed by simply adding -(e)d or -t. These have an internal vowel change as well.

There are two such groups in ModE. The first has an ending in -ght: teach - taught, seek - sought, think - thought, bring - brought, buy - bought ¹. The second has an ending in in -old: sell - sold, tell - told.

eME had these same two groups of irregular weak verbs, but they were slightly larger.

Below you will find a series of tables containing all the eME weak verbs which belong to these two groups, together with their ModE equivalents.

Regarding all tables, note:

• the eME past tense forms provided in the tables below, are 1st and 3rd person singular
• eME past tense forms which differ from their ModE counterparts are highlighted in yellow
• eME verbs which didn't survive to ModE are also highlighted in yellow

-ht

In eME, past tense forms in this group can have one of three vowels preceding -ht: a, o or u. In ModE only the -aht and -oht forms have survived, as -aught and -ought:

-ld

These behave similarly in eME and in ModE. In the present tense, the root vowel is short - e and the consonant - l, is doubled. In the past tense the root vowel is long and changes - a_ (in ModE - o). The e of the past tense suffix is elided and the double l, is reduced to a single.

The group is slightly larger in eME than in ModE.

elision of -e in -ed

The e in the weak past tense marker -ed-, may be dropped. In eME sources, e is often dropped after stems ending in d, f, l, m, n and r.

Hence brae_den, hafen, dae_len, de_men, we_nen, he_ren > brae_dde, hafde, dae_lde, de_mde, we_nde, he_rde.

NB - dropping the e is optional. Thus both hae_lede and hae_lde are acceptable. For most verbs with stems ending in d, f, l, m, n, the MED has examples of past tense forms with and without e.

Note that in ModE, the e is often silent, even if it appears in the spelling, e.g. healed, deemed. Only rarely is it dropped in the spelling as well, e.g. heard.

-ed becomes -t

When e is dropped from the weak past tense marker, the remaining -d becomes -t after certain consonants: c, p, ss, t, x. Examples are cwencen/cwencte, kissen/kiste, gre_ten/gre_tte.

In this group, verbs which have an infinitive in -encen, and a past tense in -enct-, merit special attention.

Take for example - cwencen/cwencte. Note the different quality of the final c in the eME stem. In the infinitive and present tense forms it is palatalised, e.g. /kwentS`@`n/, while in the past tense, it is not, e.g. /kweN`kt@`/.

Here is a table of all the verbs which displayed a past tense form in -enct-, in eME sources. Many of these verbs no longer exist in ModE. Those that did survive, form their past tense with -ed.

-ett

Note that if the stem ends in -ett, a third -t is not added. The past tense ending -t is effectively absorbed.

All verbs in -etten follow this pattern:

like ModE - shortened stem vowel and elision of -(e)d

So far, in our dealings with weak verbs, we have seen examples of eME verbs which behave differently to their ModE counterparts. From this point on, there is no divergence. A shortened vowel and elision of the past tense ending is only reflected in eME verbs for which the ModE counterpart also has a shortened vowel or elided past tense ending.

This affects a small group of weak verbs with stems which end in one of the following: e_d, ae_d, e_p, e_t, end.

Note that this doesn't affect all eME verbs with the stem endings listed above. The rule is simple - ModE is the guide. Where a ModE reflex of an OE past tense form has a shortened vowel, the eME reflex also has a shortened vowel. The same applies to the elision of -(e)d in the past tense form or the past participle. All the affected verbs are listed below. There are minor differences between eME and ModE forms.

shortened vowel

-e_d and -ae_d > -ed

ModE has a small number of weak verbs in which the past tense (preterite) form has a shortened vowel. The preterite ending -(e)d is also elided: bleed - bled, breed - bred, feed - fed, speed - sped, lead - lead ⁴, read - read ⁵ and spread - spread ⁵.

In eME, this shortened vowel occurs in the same verbs ⁵. However, while (e)d is dropped in the past participle, the preterite forms add -de (or -dest or -den):

-e_p > -ep

Again, these behave the same way in eME as in ModE. In the present tense, the root vowel is long. In the past tense the root vowel is short. The e of the past tense suffix is elided and the d, in contact with p, becomes t (see above).

-e_t > -et

As above, In the present tense, the root vowel is long, but in the past tense the root vowel is short. The e of the past tense suffix is elided and the d, in contact with t, becomes t (see above).

elision of -(e)d

-end

1. ModE also has catch - caught, but this is not found in OE, Orm or PC2; it was borrowed from AN cachier early in the 13th century; the MED entry cacchen (cahte), has quotations from i.a. Lmn, AW and Ch;
2. eME sle_pen also has the strong preterite form sle_p, which is more usual;
3. grae_den he_den ne_den we_den brae_den drae_den also have stems ending in ae_d or e_d, but in ModE, either there is no reflex of the verb, or -ed is added without a change in vowel in the preterite; Orm has examples of short vowels for some of these, e.g. - dredde, but corroboration in PC2 and secondary eME sources is either lacking or inconclusive; in any case, when the ModE test is applied to a group, the sole criterion becomes the ModE form; if ModE doesn't support a particular variation from OE, then the OE form is retained; for these reasons, the vowel remains unchanged - and long, as it is in OE, in the eME preterite forms;
4. /li:d/ vs /lE`d/, together with simple 'e' in the spelling;
5. rae_den and sprae_den are similar to lae_den in that the ModE preterite and past participle do not add -ed; however there is a difference: the ModE preterite and past participle do not have a simple 'e' in their spelling; the user can choose between the forms presented above and forms with long vowels, i.e. - rae_dde irae_d and sprae_dde isprae_d
6. or grette to match mette from me_ten; Lmn and Ch i.a. have grette

present tense

Present-tense endings in strong verbs are identical to those in weak verbs. These verb endings are illustrated in the table below:

the 7 strong verb classes

Where strong and weak verbs differ, is in the past tense. That is as true for ModE as it is for eME.

ModE and eME have several classes of strong verbs, each with a different sets of past-tense endings.

Below is a table which gives an example from each of eME's 7 strong verb classes as well as the corresponding ModE forms. Those classes which are not well represented in ModE have been highlighted.

1. vowel spelling or sound doesn't follow expected eME to ModE development;
2. now an adjective only;

h-stems

In the vast majority of strong verbs, the consonant at the end of the infinitive and present tense stem is carried throughout the paradigm. So for example, in ri_den s v1, the consonant <d> is found at the end of the stem in ri_den inf ri_de ri_dest ri_det` pr ra_d riden pt iriden p ptc.

In a small group of eleven strong verbs however, the consonant at the end of the infinitive and present tense stem is <h>, while the consonant at the end of the preterite plural and past participle forms, is <g>. Those eleven verbs belong to the following strong classes:

• s1 eME wri_hen inf, wri_he wri_hst wri_ht` wri_hen pr, wra_h wrigen pt iwrigen p ptc
• s2 eME te_hen inf, te_he te_hst te_ht` te_hen pr, tae_h tugen pt itogen p ptc
• s5 eME sehen inf, sehe sehst seht` sehen pr, sah sae_gen pt isegen p ptc
• s6 eME slahen inf, slahe slahst slaht` slahen pr, slo_h slo_gen pt islagen p ptc

Like

wri_hen s1

li_hen ti_hen t`i_hen s1

te_hen s2

fle_hen s2

sehen s5

(i)fehen s5

slahen s6

flahen t`wahen s6

In all the verbs listed above, the <h> can be omitted in the infinitive and the present tense¹. Note however that in class 1 and class 6 strong verbs, the root vowel of the infinitive and present tense forms changes when the <h> drops - to <e_> and <ae_> respectively.

Alternative forms without <h>:

• s1 eME wre_n inf, wre_ wre_st wre_t` wre_n pr, wra_h wrigen pt iwrigen p ptc
• s2 eME te_n inf, te_ te_st te_t` te_n pr, tae_h tugen pt itogen p ptc
• s5 eME se_n inf, se_ se_st se_t` se_n pr, sah sae_gen pt isegen p ptc
• s6 eME slae_n inf, slae_ slae_st slae_t` slae_n pr, slo_h slo_gen pt islagen p ptc

ng-stems

There are two related class 7 verbs. Their usual forms are:

• fangen inf, fange fangst fangt` fangen pr, fe_ng fe_ngen pt ifangen p ptc
• hangen inf, hange hangst hangt` hangen pr, he_ng he_ngen pt ihangen p ptc

These have the following alternative forms in the infinitive and present tense. Note that <ng> is dropped and the stem vowel becomes <o_>:

• fo_n inf, fo_ fo_st fo_t` fo_n pr
• ho_n inf, ho_ ho_st ho_t` ho_n pr

Note that in this site, I tend to drop the <h> only in those verbs which have survived to ModE, without <h> - fle_n se_n flae_n slae_n (ModE flee see flay slay). The choice of form is left to the user.

preterite-present verbs

The preterite-present verbs are so called, because the present tense forms resemble the past tense forms of strong verbs. This is still the case in the ModE counterparts of these verbs. Think of I can and he can, as opposed to I ask and he asks. The 1st and 3rd person forms are identical. The same is true for he may, he shall and he must.

In eME there is a further difference - the vowel of the 1st and 3rd person singular present tense forms, differs from the root vowel of the infinitive and plural present tense form. This is another feature of the past tense in strong verbs. Take for example - ic can vs we_ cunnen.

A few very common eME irregular verbs have somewhat different meanings to their counterparts (reflexes) in ModE. In fact, a rather neat shift in meaning has taken place between the first 4 verbs listed below: cunnen means 'know how to' rather than 'can', mugen means 'can' rather than 'may', moten means 'may' rather than 'must', and sculen means 'must', rather than 'will (in future)'.

1. the sense of 'know how' is preserved in ModE canny, cunning, and the related ken, as in beyond my ken;
2. or to be able to; eME Ic may` = ModE I am able to;
3. or to be allowed to; eME Ic mo_t = ModE I am allowed to;
4. or to be obliged to; eME Ic scal = ModE I am obliged to;
5. the sense of 'must' (obligation) is preserved in the 10 Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount in the King James version of the Bible: Thou shalt not kill etc
6. the sense of 'know' survives in ModE to wit (namely, to know), wits (mental faculties, as in keep your wits about you), witless and nitwit i.a.;
7. wa_t > wot (knows), which can be found in the King James version of the Bible: Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias?
8. OE g`emunen (to remember) was preterite-present; its eME counterpart - (i)munen, appears to have become a weak verb; the only surviving example of a 3rd person singular present form in eME, is imynaed` where OE had g`eman;
9. eME cut`e became ModE could, first by the replacement of t` with d and then the insertion of l, under the influence of would;
10. note that as well as the shift in meaning (see paragraph above), the preterite form (and 2nd person singular present) - most, has been generalised throughout the present tense en ModE; must now has no distinct past tense and we resort instead to had to or was obliged to;
11. or to be useful (worthy); eME t`at t`ing dae_h = ModE that thing is useful;
12. 1st - ic, 2nd - t`u_, 3rd - he_/sce_/it, pl - we_/y`e_/hi_

anomalous verbs

It's interesting that willen is usually branded as 'anomalous' when it closely resembles sculen (see table above). It has that characteristic feature of the preterite-present verbs, - identical forms for 1st and 3rd person singular. Note also that willen means 'want'. It is not used to indicate a future action. So, Ic wille ga_n means I want to go, not I will go.

Infinitive

In ModE the infinitive is simply the combination of to and the verb in question, e.g. - to sing, to heal, to be. The equivalent in eME is -en added to the end of the verb, e.g. - singen, hae_len, be_n.

So, ModE I like to sing and you want to be become me_ li_keth singen and t`u_ wilt be_n in eME.

Present participle

The eME present participle, corresponding to ModE -ing, is -ende.

Examples are askende hae_lende singende.

Note that in eME, participles can be used as adjectives or adverbs, but not as nouns. So note the eME equivalents of these ModE phrases:

• the singing nun = t`e singende minecen (adjective);
• singing softly, she approached us = singende softe, sce_ ge_ng ony`ae_n us (adverb);
• his singing is terrible = his singing is atel (noun);

Subjunctive forms

Unfamiliar with the term? Get a brief description »

In Modern English, the subjunctive generally only affects the form of the 3rd person singular. But in Early Middle English it affects the 2nd person singular form as well. So we get:

• T`e king be_det` t`at t`u_ singe for him - The king commands that you sing for him or The king commands you to sing for him
• Ic wille t`at t`u_ wite - I want you to know

Note the form of the 2nd person singular verb - singe, not singest. All three singular subjunctive forms end in -e. The plural subjunctive forms end in -en, which is the same as the indicative. In irregular verbs, the stem for the present subjunctive, both singular and plural, is generally the plural stem, e.g. cunn~e ~en, scul~e ~en, mug~e ~en and be_ ~n.

Note also that the ModE construction I command/want/need person X to do something is rendered as I be_de/wille/t`arf t`at man X do_ oht, where the verb represented here by do_, is in the subjunctive.

The other difference is that eME has a past subjunctive. There are only two different past subjunctive forms in any given verb - one for singular and one for plural. In weak verbs, the past subjunctive singular form is identical to the past indicative 1st and 3rd person form. In strong verbs, on the other hand, the past subjunctive singular form is identical to the past indicative 2nd person form.

Perhaps a simpler way to think of it is this: the stem for the subjunctive, both past and present, in all verbs, is the plural stem, e.g. cut`~e ~en, sculd~e ~en, miht~e ~en, wae_r~e ~en, hae_led~e ~en and sung~e ~en.

In The following table, hae_len is a weak verb, while singen is a strong verb.

subjunctive forms are based on the plural stem

That principle is clearly illustrated in the following table. The only exception - si_e and si_en from wesen (to be), is highlighted.

Note - subjunctive forms are in bold type:

Note also that the subjunctive is used more often in eME than in ModE. That's because an infinitive construction has replaced some previous uses of the subjunctive. For example, we would say "I order you to stand down", where eME has only the equivalent of "I order that you stand down".

imperative plural

ModE has only one form for the imperative mood in each verb. It's identical to the 1st person (and most common) form. Examples are: Move! Look! Go! eME has this ending-less form for the singular as well as an -et` ending for the plural.

• Stir! Beha_ld! Ga_! (t`u_)
• Stiret`! Beha_ldet`! Ga_t`! (y`e_)

no future tense

There is no future tense in eME. The forms of the verb do not change to indicate a future action or state. That's true for ModE as well. However, neither are willen and sculen used to indicate a future action or state, as will and shall are in ModE.

Instead, it is context which indicates that an action takes place in the future, in eME. Often, this will involve a temporal adverb or adverbial phrase like 'tomorrow' or 'soon' or 'in the coming days'. But sometimes, the present tense alone is enough.

• Ic ga_ to_ Wintencester (so_ne_) = I'll go to Winchester
• Ic ga_ to_morgen = I'll go tomorrow