There are several verbs in English, which, from the necessity of their union with other verbs, have obtained the name of auxiliaries. Originally they were principal verbs, with regular Saxon infinitives, and the usual inflections; as may be observed by any person, who has the smallest acquaintance with the modern German, which retains more of the ancient structure, than any other branch of the primitive language.
The verbs, called auxiliaries or helpers, are do, be, have, shall, will, may, can, must. The three first are often employed alone, and are therefore acknowleged to be sometimes principal verbs. That the others were so, will be made obvious by a specimen from the German, with the corresponding English.
| German. | English. | |
|---|---|---|
| Inf. | Wollen, | to will. |
| Ind. Pref. | Ich will, | I will. |
| Wir wollen,[109] | we will. | |
| Imper. | Ich wolte, | I would. |
| Preterit. | Ich habe gewolt, | I have would, or willed. |
| Plup. | Ich hatte gewolt, | I had would. |
| Fut. | Ich werde wollen, | I shall will. |
| Imp. | Wolle du, | will thou. |
| Subj. | Ich wolle, | (if) I would, &c. |
| Inf. | Wollen, | to will. |
| Gewolte haben, | to have would, or willed. | |
| Part. | Wollend, | willing. |
| Gewollte, | having would, or willed. |
Sollen, to shall, is inflected in the same manner. Koennen, to can, or be able, is inflected much in the same manner. Ich kann, I can, &c. Imperfect, Ich konnte, I could. Preterit, Ich habe gehonnt, I have could (or been able.) Participle, Kænnend, canning, being able. Thus mægen, to may, makes, in the past tenses, Ich mochte, I might or mought, as the vulgar sometimes pronounce it; Ich habe gemocht, I have might. Must also, which in English has lost all inflection, is varied in the German; mussen, to must, or be obliged; Imperfect, Ich muste, I must, or was obliged.
But whatever these verbs may have once been, yet from their loss of several inflections and the participles, with their singular use in combination with other verbs, they may very well be denominated auxiliary verbs. Their true force in English should be ascertained and explained in grammars for the benefit of learners, and particularly for the assistance of foreigners;[110] yet in resolving sentences, each should be considered as a verb or distinct part of speech.
For want of a clear and accurate knowlege of the English auxiliaries, foreigners are apt to fall into material errors in constructing sentences. The most numerous errors appear in the use of will and shall, and their inflections. The Scots and Irish, even of the first rank, generally use will for shall in the first person; by which means, they substitute a promise for an intended prediction. Several errors of this kind have escaped the notice of the most celebrated writers.
"Without having attended to this, we will be at a loss in understanding several passages in the classics, which relate to the public speaking, and the theatrical entertainments of the ancients."——Blair's Lectures, p. 48. Philad. edit.
"In the Latin language, there are no two words, we would more readily take to be synonimous, than amare and diligere."——The same, p. 83.
In these and several other instances which occur in Blair's writings, the words will and would are used very improperly, for shall and should. The author means only to foretell certain events, and has employed words which carry, to an English ear, the full force of a promise.
English writers have rarely fallen into this error; yet a few instances may be found in authors of reputation.