¹ Otto Jespersen The Philosophy of Grammar, London 1924 (here abbreviated PG); A Modern English Grammar, Part III, Heidelberg 1927 (here MEG); The System of Grammar, London 1933 (here SyG).

² E. A. Sonnenschein A New English Grammar, Cambridge 1921 (here abbreviated NEG); The Soul of Grammar, Cambridge 1927 (here SoG).

³ Morgan Callaway, Jr., ‘Concerning the Number of Cases in Modern English’ PMLA 42.238–54 (1927).

⁴ W. E. Collinson, The “Soul of Grammar” and the “Philosophy of Grammar” with Special Reference to the Question of English Cases'Mn. Lang. Rev 23 129–44 (1928).

⁵ PG 49, 50.

⁶ Among pronouns he of course admitted the latter—as distinct from the ‘nominative’, however.

⁷ PG 44.

⁸ SyG 25.

⁹ Neither Sonnenschein nor Callaway understood this. The latest offender writes in JEGP 34.414–31 (1935).

¹⁰ ‘Form and/or Function in Grammar’ JEGP 35.462 (1936).

¹¹ PG51.

¹² For these two terms we shall use henceforward IO and DO, respectively.

¹³ PG 182.

¹⁴ Collinson saw this (op cit. 137) as the ‘one opening for a counter-attack’ on Jespersen, but did not sufficiently stress the striking contradiction in method which it involves.

¹⁵ I am indebted to Prof. C. C Fries for drawing my attention to this. We have in preparation a treatment of the history of this phrase.

¹⁶ PG 18 f.

¹⁷ See Jespersen's explanations of this, MEG 14.7₄. Ibid., 14.7₆ he quotes examples of this bound order; a few might seem to contradict the above statement, but they are all exceptional, and only one is from MnE.

¹⁸ Give it me and its ilk have died out of normal American, and even in written English constitute a none too vigorous survival. The competing Give it to me, with the to-phrase instead of the IO, outnumbers it heavily, according to a count I have recently made: 6 to 1 in Wells's Love and Mr. Lewisham and The History of Mr. Polly, 12 to 1 in Barrie's Margaret Ogilvy, The Admirable Crichton, and Quality Street, and 2½ to 1 in Butler's Erewhon Revisited. Nor can the weakness of this pattern be ascribed to a general weakening of the IO with respect to the to-phrase, since in the same books I find the IO's always outnumbering the to-phrases: Wells, 99 to 79; Barrie, 93 to 85; Butler 172 to 95: Incidentally, it as IO, but in the normal nominal order—e.g., the harsh lines on his face give it a strong individuality—also appears in the above books once in Barrie and twice in Butler.

¹⁹ See Jespersen's rejection of the Vocative, SyG 25 f.; also Collinson, op. cit. 134.

²⁰ SoG begins with an excellent short discussion of this matter.

²¹ His name for the uninflected case, ‘Common’ (borrowed from Sweet), as Sonnenschein says (SoG 7–8), is very poor. Case names describe functions; this describes form.

²² MeG 14.1₂.

²³ SoG.