fusion between the nominative and the objective of the pronouns sprang up in the sixteenth century. This was the case with ye and you. They said, also, It is me; between you and I. Shakespeare, while employing both ye and you, does not observe this old distinction between them. Nor do we of the present day, although attempts have been made, notably by the rhetorician Campbell, a century ago, to revive it. We have simply adopted the form you (originally objective) for both nominative and objective.

7. Thou and You.-In addressing a single person the Anglo-Saxons always used the pronoun in the singular. But thou has yielded to you, except among the Friends, in poetry, and in prayer. In this substitution of the plural for the singular, "as though the person addressed were as good as two or more ordinary people," which was begun in the thirteenth century and completed in the sixteenth, we have followed especially the lead of the Dutch and the French. On its way to extinction in the speech of polite life and of literature, thou came to be used as the pronoun of (1) affection towards friends, (2) good-humored superiority to servants, and (3) contempt or anger to strangers." All these uses are illustrated in Shakespeare and in the literature of his day.

8. Ours, Yours, Hers, and Theirs.—The s of the genitive, seen in his and then in its, was extended, by a false analogy, to our, your, her, and their, when unconnected with nouns, and so made double genitives of them—This book is ours or yours or hers or theirs. Ourn, yourn, hern, his'n, theirn, vulgar and ungrammatical as they are, are dialectical, forming their double genitive in n rather than s, after the fashion of the n declension.

In Anglo-Saxon there were the possessive adjective

pronouns (1) min and thin, exactly like the genitive of the first and second personal pronouns, and (2) ūre and ēower (our and your), exact duplicates of the genitive plural of these same pronouns. So that when, in passing into English, the genitive of the personal pronouns also was restricted to the possessive relation, and the endings of the possessive adjectives were dropped, it became difficult to tell whether the forms used belonged to the one class of pronouns or to the other.

9. Self. In the Anglo-Saxon the ordinary personal pronouns are used as reflexive pronouns as well. They are so used in English, especially in poetry.

And millions in those solitudes, since first the flight of years began, have laid them down in their last sleep.-Bryant.

But these pronouns were frequently strengthened by the addition of silf, sylf, seolf, or self-meaning the same, the aforesaid-used as an adjective, and agreeing in number and case with the pronoun it strengthened. Used to strengthen the pronoun when it was the subject of the sentence, the pronoun had to be repeated in the dative before self; as, He (him) self did it. This was its customary employment. Since about 1350, self has followed the objective of the third personal pronoun, and is attached to it for self at first always stood alone,—and we say himself, herself, itself, and themselves; but in the first and second persons, self is appended to the possessive case of the pronouns, and we say myself, thyself, ourself, yourself, ourselves, and yourselves.

It would seem that self early had, and all along down has retained, something of a substantive force. An adjective can stand between it and the possessive of the pronoun; it can be modified by a noun, and by the pronoun one, in the pos

sessive, and can stand in the nominative and in the objective case.

My very self was yours.-Otway. Till Glory's self is twilight.Byron. Orpheus' self may heave his head.-Milton. To thine own self be true.-Shakespeare.

And perhaps one's self is more commonly used now than oneself.

When self united with the pronoun, it was mainly (1) to make with it a reflexive, or (2) for the sake of emphasis. But the compound could stand alone as nominative.

Thyself shall see the act.—Shakespeare. Myself am hell.-Milton. And this use of self, never very common and almost abandoned, is creeping into favor again, it is thought. There can be no doubt that usage is overwhelmingly in favor of the simple personal pronouns as subject, and restricts the compound with self to the function (1) of emphasis, as in, You yourself shall go; and (2) to that of a reflexive, as in, He made himself useful. We have seen that, at least in poetry, the simple pronoun, after verbs used transitively, takes upon itself this reflexive office; and after certain prepositions, also, upon, about, around, etc., we employ the simple pronoun; but after others, to, by, for, etc., we use the compound.

The young prince promised to take upon him the obligations.-Scott. My uncle stopped a minute to look about him.-Dickens. It is disputed what aim a translator should propose to himself.-Matthew Arnold. He claimed to decide for himself.-New-York Tribune.

XXI. The Interrogative Pronouns. Our interrogatives, who, which, and what, in all their forms, are Anglo-Saxon interrogatives; and even our why is traceable to the same parentage. But, as has been said, our wh is Anglo-Saxon

hw. Our interrogative whose and whom are restricted to persons, but the corresponding Anglo-Saxon forms could be used when mere things were asked about. Our which is a compound of hwi (what) and lic (like), and is an adjective, as well as an interrogative pronoun. Whether, now a conjunction, is an Anglo-Saxon interrogative from hwa (who) and the comparative suffix ther. It came into English with its two functions of adjective and interrogative pronouns, as may be seen in,

Whether is greater the gift or the altar.-Matt. xxiii. 19. Unsure to whether side it would incline.-Spenser.

In the seventeenth century, which took the place of whether in both these offices.

In the Elizabethan period there was much confusion respecting the case-forms of the interrogative who, as there was respecting those of the personal and demonstrative proWho often stood where now we should place whom. Who hath he left behind him general ?-King Lear, IV. 3, 6. Who does the wolf love ?-Coriol. II. 1, 8. With who?-Oth. IV. 2, 99. To who?-Cymb. IV. 2, 75. Who have we here ?-Winter's Tale, IV. 3,

nouns.

636.

It is not always easy, even now, to keep the right forms of the interrogatives. How common such questions as, Who did you find there? Who did he marry? How easily even Hawthorne glides into, And who do you think I saw standing on deck?

XXII. The Relative Pronouns.-In Anglo-Saxon a real relative pronoun was wanting. To express the subordinacy of an accessory clause the language used the indeclinable pe (1) alone or (2) in conjunction with the demonstrative se, seo, pæt, or (3) in connection with the personal pronoun.

1. That. The office of the relative was first assumed in

English by that, the neuter of the old Anglo-Saxon demonstrative se, sẽo, pat. This is in general use to-day, relating

to nouns or pronouns of any gender, person, or case, in either number. Being the oldest relative, the author of the Humble Petition of Who and Which was infelicitous in his choice of a verb when he makes these two pronouns say, "We . . . kept up our dignity and honor many years, till the JackSprat that supplanted us."

2. Which and Who.-Very soon after the Conquest the interrogative which was employed as a relative to aid that, and, like that, related to nouns denoting persons as well as to those naming things. The interrogative who was metamorphosed into a relative somewhat later. The transition of these interrogatives to relatives was easy. We might, after Abbott and Whitney, illustrate the transfer thus: Who steals my purse? He steals trash = He who steals my purse steals trash. Which barked? I see the dog: dog which barked.

=

I see the

The relative which, like the interrogative, is used as an adjective. When so used, the noun that which modifies is repeated exactly or in substance from the preceding clause. The repetition gives definiteness, and prevents doubt as to the reference.

If she did play false the fault was hers, which fault lies, etc.—King John, I. 1, 119. She took the opportunity of going to Bath; for which place she set out.-Fielding. Ennius writes in regard to Homer; of which poet he was, etc.-Lounsbury.

Used as an adjective or as a pronoun, which is frequently preceded by the. Compare the French lequel.

There he espied his roll, the which he with trembling and haste catched up.-Bunyan. Let gentleness my strong enforcement be, in the which hope I blush.-As You Like It, II. 7, 19. The better part