[91] Cf. Fr. chez = (in) casis.
[92] We choose this term in preference to ‘reaction,’ which, in the physical sciences, has a specific meaning not applicable here.
[93] And by the expectation thus created of the regular occurrence of such differentiation between past singular and past plural, even where this ablaut did not show different vowels.
[94] Thus says Professor Skeat, Etymological Dictionary, s.v.; others maintain that it is due to Northumbrian preservation of a, which in the South became o.
[95] Professor Skeat (Principles of English Etymology, p. 411) draws a useful distinction between homographs and homophones, or words spelled alike and those sounded alike. For our purpose, as students of the spoken language, the homophones alone are of importance. A homograph is commonly, but not invariably, a homophone; cf. ‘I read now’ and ‘Yesterday I read.’ We need not here further consider such vagaries of English spelling.
[96] It is unnecessary to point out in the text that we must bear in mind that French nouns or adjectives are almost always derived from the accusative case as representative of the oblique cases. For the full explanation of this see Brachet’s Grammaire Historique, Introd.
[97] See Skeat, Etymological Dictionary, s.v. settle; Stratman, s.v. sahtlen.
[98] Skeat, Principles of English Etymology, p. 410.
[99] Or rather Fr. (je) cesse. Just as, in the French language, we must explain most nouns from the Latin accusative form, so in English most of the verbs which we owe to French can only be explained by the ‘strong’ forms, e.g. first person singular of the present tense; as complain from je complain, and not from complaindre; to despise, O.Fr. tu despis, not infinitive despire; to prevail, je prévail, not prévaloir; to relieve, je (re)lieve, not from relever; to acquire, j’acquier, not from acquérir.
[100] See Skeat, s.v.