[§ 297]. In the present English there is no undoubted perfect or reduplicate form. The form moved corresponds in meaning not with τέτυφα and momordi, but with ἔτυψα and vixi. Its sense is that of ἔτυψα, and not that of τέτυφα. The notion given by τέτυφα we express by the circumlocution I have beaten. We have no such form as bebeat or memove. In the Mœso-Gothic, however, there was a true reduplicate form; in other words, a perfect tense as well as an aorist. It is by the possession of this form that the verbs of the first six conjugations are characterized.
| Mœso-Gothic. | English. Mœso-Gothic. | English. | ||
| 1st. | Falþa, | I fold | Fáifalþ, | I have folded, or I folded. |
| Halda, | I feed | Háihald, | I have fed, or I fed. | |
| Haha, | I hang | Háihah, | I have hanged, or I hanged. | |
| 2nd. | Háita, | I call | Háiháit, | I have called, or I called. |
| Láika, | I play | Láiláik, | I have played, or I played. | |
| 3rd. | Hláupa, | I run | Hláiláup, | I have run, or I ran. |
| 4th. | Slêpa, | I sleep | Sáizlêp, | I have slept, or I slept. |
| 5th. | Láia, | I laugh | Láilô, | I have laughed, or I laught. |
| Sáija, | I sow | Sáisô, | I have sown, or I sowed. | |
| 6th. | Grêta, | I weep | Gáigrôt, | I have wept, or I wept. |
| Téka, | I touch | Táitôk, | I have touched, or I touched. | |
In Mœso-Gothic, as in Latin, the perfect forms have, besides their own, an aorist sense, and vice versâ.
In Mœso-Gothic, as in Latin, few (if any) words are found in both forms.
In Mœso-Gothic, as in Latin, the two forms are dealt with as a single tense; láilô being called the præterite of láia, and svôr the præterite of svara. The true view, however, is that in Mœso-Gothic, as in Latin, there are two past tenses, each having a certain latitude of meaning, and each, in certain words, replacing the other.
The reduplicate form, in other words, the perfect tense, is current in none of the Gothic languages except the
Mœso-Gothic. A trace of it is said to be found in the Anglo-Saxon of the seventh century in the word heht, which is considered to be hê-ht, the Mœso-Gothic háiháit, vocavi. Did from do is also considered to be a reduplicate form.
[§ 298]. In the English language the tense corresponding with the Greek aorist and the Latin forms like vixi, is formed after two modes; 1, as in fell, sang, and took, from fall, sing, and take, by changing the vowel of the present: 2, as in moved and wept, from move and weep, by the addition of -d or -t; the -d or -t not being found in the original word, but being a fresh element added to it. In forms, on the contrary, like sang and fell, no addition being made, no new element appears. The vowel, indeed, is changed, but nothing is added. Verbs, then, of the first sort, may be said to form their præterites out of themselves; whilst verbs of the second sort require something from without. To speak in a metaphor, words like sang and fell are comparatively independent. Be this as it may, the German grammarians call the tenses formed by a change of vowel the strong tenses, the strong verbs, the strong conjugation, or the strong order; and those formed by the addition of d or t, the weak tenses, the weak verbs, the weak conjugation, or the weak order. Bound, spoke, gave, lay, &c., are strong; moved, favoured, instructed, &c., are weak.