(4) English has no grammar in the sense of forms, or inflections, but takes account merely of the nature and the uses of words in sentences.
The older idea and its origin.
Fierce discussions have raged over these opinions, and numerous works have been written to uphold the theories. The first of them remained popular for a very long time. It originated from the etymology of the word grammar (Greek gramma, writing, a letter), and from an effort to build up a treatise on English grammar by using classical grammar as a model.
Perhaps a combination of (1) and (3) has been still more popular, though there has been vastly more classification than there are forms.
The opposite view.
During recent years, (2) and (4) have been gaining ground, but they have had hard work to displace the older and more popular theories. It is insisted by many that the student's time should be used in studying general literature, and thus learning the fluent and correct use of his mother tongue. It is also insisted that the study and discussion of forms and inflections is an inexcusable imitation of classical treatises.
The difficulty.
Which view shall the student of English accept? Before this is answered, we should decide whether some one of the above theories must be taken as the right one, and the rest disregarded.
The real reason for the diversity of views is a confusion of two distinct things,—what the definition of grammar should be, and what the purpose of grammar should be.
The material of grammar.