These two statements bear upon the future history of the præterite. That of the two forms sang and sung, one will, in the course of language, become obsolete is nearly certain; and, as the plural form is also that of the participle, it is the plural form which is most likely to be the surviving one.
[§ 406]. As a general rule, we find the participle in -en wherever the præterite is strong; indeed, the participle in -en may be called the strong participle, or the participle of the strong conjugation. Still the two forms do not always coincide. In mow, mowed, mown; sow, sowed, sown; and several other words, we find the participle strong, and the præterite weak. I remember no instances of the converse. This is only another way of saying that the præterite has a greater tendency to pass from strong to weak than the participle.
[§ 407]. In the Latin language the change from s to r, and vice versâ, is very common. We have the double forms arbor and arbos, honor and honos, &c. Of this change we have a few specimens in English. The words rear and raise, as compared with each other, are examples. In Anglo-Saxon a few words undergo a similar change in the plural number of the strong præterites.
Ceóse, I choose; ceás, I chose; curon, we chose; gecoren, chosen.
Forleóse, I lose; forleás, I lost; forluron, we lost; forloren, lost.
Hreose, I rush; hreás, I rushed; hruron, we rushed; gehroren, rushed.
This accounts for the participial form forlorn, or lost, in New High German verloren. In Milton's lines,
—— the piercing air
Burns frore, and cold performs the effect of fire.