Of these, some have no other office than to assist in forming certain tenses of Principal Verbs; these are, may, can, shall, could, might, would, should, ought, must.
Others are sometimes, also, Principal Verbs themselves; as, will, have, had, do, did, let, be.
1. Am and was are sometimes used improperly. "From which we are severed," should be "have severed." "Was also ceased," should be "Had also ceased."
2. Am and was may be used as auxiliaries only when the principal verb implies motion, or change of condition; as, "I was gone;" "I was fallen;" "I am come;" "He is fled." "You was," instead of "You were," is inadmissible, though some grammarians justify the phrase.
3. Sometimes do and did stand in the place of the principal verbs to which they refer; as, "He loves not play as thou dost," that is, as "thou lovest." Sometimes do and did are used for emphasis; as, "I do love thee;" "Nay, but thou didst call me." Don't, when used for does not, is a vulgarisin. It is properly a contraction of do not, and not of does not.
Were and did are improperly used for would be and should in the following sentence: "It were an intolerable spectacle, did they behold one of their fellows in the agonies of death." Doth and hath, in serious compositions, are properly used in stead of does and has. They have the merit, also, of being more smooth and soft in pronunciation. I'd rather, in familiar discourse, stands, properly, not for I had rather, but for I would rather.
4. Care should be taken, when an ellipsis is made, that the construction be the same as if the omitted words were introduced ; for example, "He always has been, and now is, a sober man." It would not answer to say, "He always has, and now is, a sober man;" nor to say, "I am, and always have taken, great pains." Here am does not suit taken great pains. The meaning to be conveyed was, "I am taking, and always," &c. Each clause must be complete in itself where auxiliaries are used.
5. Shall and Will.-These are apt to be used, the one for the other, erroneously; as in the case of the drowning foreigner, who, sinking in the Thames, exclaimed, "I will be drowned, and no one shall help me;" or again, as in the case of a common expression of Irish servants, "Shall you take tea, and will I bring it to you?"
Even so good a writer as Dr. Blair sometimes confounds these words; as, "Without having attended to this, we will be at a loss," &c. "There are no two words we would naturally take," &e. Shall and should are the proper words. Again, "Think what reflection shall most probably arise." Will is here the proper word.
"In the first person, simply shall foretells; In will a threat, or else a promise dwells: Shall, in the second and third, does threat ; Will simply, then, foretells the future feat."
— BRIGHTLAND.
Shall, from the Saxon, originally means to owe, to be under oo ligation to a superior. "Thou shalt not kill," means, "Thou art under obligation not to kill. "You shall go," implies an obligation resulting from the command of another. As the being obliged or compelled to do a thing implies that the act is future, this word sometimes expresses only the idea of futurity as to the act named; as, "I shall go to-morrow." On the other hand, will de notes determination, purpose, and as this generally has reference to a future act, the word sometimes carries no other meaning than that of futurity.
6. Harrison thus illustrates the principle: "I shall go to town. to-morrow." Here simply the intention of doing a certain thing is expressed, without any anticipation of, or reference to, hindrance. But when I say, "I will go to town to-morrow," I declare my resolution to do so, in spite of all opposition. "I must and will go to town to-morrow." ." In both these cases, the person who speaks is also the person who is about to act. He, therefore, at pleasure, expresses an act of simple volition, or of fixed purpose, according to circumstances. Both are at his own option; he has the control of both in his own mind. But, when we pass to the second person, thou shalt, or thou wilt, it is to be borne in mind that the first person is still the speaker, though the second person is the actor. If, therefore, the acting of the second person is de pendent upon the will of the first, the first person says thou shalt, and not thou wilt, for the willing rests with the first person; but if the first person leaves the second to act as he may think proper, he says thou wilt, and thus claims no authority over that willing. Again, in the third person, he shall, or he will, we see the same principle. When the first person says he shall, he deprives the third of the exercise of his own will; but when he says he will, he leaves him in the exercise of that will, and simply expresses his belief that it is the intention or will of the third person to do this or that.
7. When, however, we pass to the interrogative forms of shall and will, the case is reversed. In the second person of the verb, we simply inquire what the will of that person is, implying that it is not subject to the control of the person asking. We, there fore, say, wilt thou? or, will you? In the third person of the verb, again, the act of willing remains with that person, and we simply ask, will he? if plural, will they? Thus, Shall I go to London? Wilt thou go? Will he go? Shall we go? Will you go? Will they go?
8. Will, as a principal verb, must not be confounded with will an auxiliary.
9. Would and Should-Would refers either to present or past time, and expresses volition; and is sometimes, like should, used as a simple future; as, "He said he would go to-morrow;" or, that he should go to-morrow."
Should generally expresses obligation or duty, and that in the past or present. In the former case should is connected with a past tense of the verb; as, John should have gone yesterday. "I should do it," means, "I feel it my duty to do it." "I should have done it," "I ought to have done it."
Should sometimes denotes a supposed future event, in all the persons. "If he should attend school, he would find it a great advantage." "If he would attend," &c., refers to volition, determination, as well as to contingency; and implies that there is an aversion to do it.
Should, after the conjunction that, is used indefinitely; as, "He said that he should go." Should and would are employed to soften the form of expression; as, "It would seem to be wrong," instead of " it seems to be wrong." "I should think him in error," for "I think him in error."
10. Will or shall follows a present tense; would or should fol lows a past tense; as, "I say that I will come;" "I said that I would come." "I think that I shall attend;" "I thought that I should attend."
Will the present tense, and would in the past, are used to denote repeated or customary action; as, "He will smoke all day." "He would smoke all day."
Had is sometimes used for would, or would have. "I had rather not," "I would," &c. "My fate had been his," "would have been his." May refers to a present or future privilege, might to a past one.
"He is attentive to his studies that he may learn;" "he was attentive, &c., that he might learn." Ought is a defective verb, and does not admit before it an auxiliary verb; such as "I had ought," for "I ought," and "Don't ought," for "ought not."
