are called Singular forms, and are said to be in the Singular Number. On the other hand, in the Latin language the words plus and pluralis mean more or many; so that the form with s, like father-s, son-s, and hors-es, denoting respectively two (or more) fathers, two (or more) sons, two (or more) horses, are called Plural forms, or are said to be in the Plural Number. In the English language we may therefore say that there are two numbers, the Singular and the Plural. The Singular speaks of one (a father), and the Plural speaks of more than one (fathers, books).

§ 112. The Plural Number is formed from the Singular, and not the Singular from the Plural. The words horses, fathers, &c., are formed from horse and father, and not vice versa.

§ 113. In most words, in English, the plural number is, in the spoken language, formed from the singular by the addition of the sound of the s in seal, of the z in zeal, or of the syllable ez; as stag-z, stack-s, stag-ez.

§ 114. The plural number is expressed in the written language by the letter s, or by the syllable es. The letter z and the syllable ez, although sounded, are never written. This, however, is a matter of orthography, not of etymology. See § 44, and § 45, stag-s, stack-s, stag-es.

§ 115. Which of the three additions (z, s, or ez) be the one adopted depends upon the nature of the last sound of the singular. See §§ 44, 45.

§ 116. If the last sound of the singular be that of the letters, or z, or of the sh in shine, or of the zin azure, the addition is that of the sound of the syllable -ez (spelt -es); as loss-ez, kiss-ez, blaz-ez, haz-ez,

blush-ez, lash-ez, spelt loss-es, kiss-es, blaz-es, haz-es, blush-es, lash-es.

Observe. Words ending in the sound of the ch in chest. and the j in jest, really end in sh and zh (§ 39), and form their plurals accordingly: as church, church-ez ; crutch, crutch-ez; witch, witch-ez; judge, judg-ez; barge, barg-ez; spelt church-es, crutch-es, witch-es, judg-es, barg-es.

Observe. As the sound of the letter x is equivalent to that of ks (or cks, or cs), words ending in that letter really end in -s, and form their plurals accordingly; as box (bocks), box-ez (bocks-ez); fox (focks), fox-ez (focks-ez); spelt box-es, fox-es, &c.

§ 117. If the last sound of the singular be that of a sharp mute (not s or sh), the sound added to it in order to form the plural is that of the letter s in seal: as top, top-s; muff, muff-s; cat, cat-s; moth, moth-s; stack, stack-s. (See § 44.)

§ 118. If the last sound of the singular be that of a flat mute (not z or zh), a liquid, or a vowel, the sound added to it in order to form the plural is that of the z in zeal as slab, slab-z; slave, slave-z; lad, lad-z; dog, dog-z; hill, hill-z; drum, drum-z; hen, hen-z; bar, bar-z; day, day-z; flea, flea-z; bow, bow-z; spelt slabs, slaves, lads, dogs, hills, drums, hens, bars, days, fleas, bows.

§ 119. Having gone through the details given above, we are now enabled to give the rule for the formation of the plural in more general language. We can now say that the greater part of the English plurals is formed by the addition of the sound of s, modified according to the termination of the singular.

$120. Plural of certain words in f.-The following words end in the sharp mute f: loaf, half, wife, life, calf, leaf. Now, according to § 117, their plurals should be formed by the addition of the sound of s in seal, and so be loafs, halfs, wifes, lifes, calfs, leafs (pronounced loafce, halfce, wifce, lifce, calfce, leafce). This, however, is not the case.

Their plurals are formed by the addition of the sound of z in zeal, and are loaves, halves, wives, lives, calves, leaves (pronounced loavz, halvz, wivz, livz, calvz, leavz); the sound of the ƒ being changed into that of v. Respecting these words we must observe:

1. That the vowel before ƒ is long. Words like muff, where the vowel is short, form their plurals by means of the sound of the s in seal; as muff, muff-s (pronounced muffce).

2. That they are all of Anglo-Saxon origin. In the words mischief, chief, handkerchief, grief, relief, the plural is formed as in muff; that is, by the addition of the sound of s; as mischiefs, chiefs, &c.

Putting these two facts together, we can use more general language, and say that

When a word ends in the sound of f, preceded by a long vowel, and is of Anglo-Saxon origin, the plural is formed by the addition of the sound of the z in zeal.

To this rule there are two exceptions.

1. Dwarf; a word of Anglo-Saxon origin, but which forms its plural by means of the sound of s-dwarfs (pronounced dwarfce).

2. Beef; a word not of Anglo-Saxon origin, but which forms its plural by means of the sound of z— beeves (pronounced beevz).

If we ask the reason of this peculiarity in the form

ation of the plurals of these words in -f, we shall find reason to believe that it lies with the singular rather than the plural forms. In Anglo-Saxon, ƒ at the end of a word was sounded as v; and it is highly probable that the original singulars were sounded loav, halv, wive, calv, leav.

§ 121. Plural forms in -ce. 1. According to § 118 the word penny should form its plural by means of the sound of the z in zeal. It does so, and, consequently, there is the plural form pennies (penniz): but, besides this, there is the form pence.

Now there are two plurals to the word penny, because there are two meanings. Six pennies means six separate penny-pieces. Six pence (or sixpence) means a single coin equivalent to six penny-pieces.

The plural pence has a further peculiarity. According to § 118, it ought to end in the sound of z in zeal, which it does not: it ends in the sound of s in seal. This serves to distinguish it from the plural of pen, which is penz (spelt pens).

2. Dice. This word ends in the sound of s in seal, when, according to § 118, it should end in the sound of z in zeal. This serves to distinguish dice for play from dies (diez) for coining.

§ 122. Equivocal forms from Singulars in s. - The Number of the following words has always been a matter of discussion amongst Grammarians.

1. Alms. Some say, these alms are useful; in which case the word alms is plural. Others say, this alms is useful; in which case the word alms is singular. Now in the word alms the -s is no sign of the plural number, but part of the original singular, like the s in goose or

loss. The Anglo-Saxon form was almesse. standing this, we cannot say alms-es in the

Notwith

same way that we can say loss-es. Hence the word alms is, in respect to its original form, singular; in respect to its meaning, either singular or plural.

2. Riches. Most writers say, riches are useful; in which case the word riches is plural. Still there are a few who say, riches is useful; in which case the word riches is singular. Now in the word riches the -s is no sign of the plural number, since there is no such substantive as rich; on the contrary, it is part of the original singular, like the s in distress. The form in the original French, from which language it was derived, was richesse. Notwithstanding this, we cannot say richeses in the same way that we can say distress-es. Hence the word riches is, in respect to its original form, singular; in respect to its meaning, either singular or plural, most frequently the latter.

3. News. Some say, this news is good; in which case the word news is singular. More rarely we find the expression these news are good; in which case the word news is plural. Now in the word news the -s (unlike the s in alms and riches) is no part of the original singular, but the sign of the plural, like the s in trees. Notwithstanding this, we cannot subtract the s, and say new, in the same way that we can form tree from trees. Hence the word news is, in respect to its original form, plural; in respect to its meaning, either singular or plural, most frequently the former.

4. Means. Some say, these means are useful; in which case the word means is plural. Others say, this means is useful; in which case the word means is sin