§ 316. _Durst_.--The verb _dare_ is both transitive and intransitive. We can say either _I dare do such a thing_, or _I dare (challenge) such a man to do it_. This, in the present tense, is unequivocally correct. In the past the double power of the word _dare_ is ambiguous; still it is, to my mind at least, allowable. We can certainly say _I dared him to accept my challenge_; and we can, perhaps, say _I dared venture on the expedition_. In this last sentence, however, _durst_ is the preferable expression. Now, although _dare_ is both transitive and intransitive, _durst_ is only intransitive. It never agrees with the Latin word _provoco_; only with the Latin word _audeo_. Moreover, the word _durst_ has both a present and a past sense. The difficulty which it presents consists in the presence of the -st, letters characteristic of the second person singular, but here found in all the persons alike; as _I durst_, _they durst_, &c. This has still to be satisfactorily accounted for. _Must_.--A form common to all persons, numbers, and tenses. That neither the -s nor the -t are part of the original root, is indicated by the Scandinavian form _maae_ (Danish), pronounced _moh_; præterite _maatt_. This form has still to be satisfactorily accounted for. _Wist_.--In its present form a regular præterite from _wiss_ = _know_. The difficulties of this word arise from the parallel forms _wit_ (as in _to wit_), and _wot_ = _knew_. The following are the forms of this peculiar word:-- In Mœso-Gothic, 1 sing. pres. ind. _váit_; 2. do., _váist_; 1 pl. _vitum_; præterite 1 s. _vissa_; 2 _vissêss_; 1 pl. _vissêdum_. From the form _váist_ we see that the second singular is formed after the manner of _must_; that is, _váist_ stands instead of _váit-t_. From the form _vissêdum_ we see that the præterite is not strong, but weak; therefore that _vissa_ is euphonic for _vista_. In Anglo-Saxon.--_Wât_, _wást_, _witon_, _wiste_, and _wisse_, _wiston_.--Hence the double forms, _wiste_, and _wisse_, verify the statement concerning the Mœso-Gothic _vissa_. In Icelandic.--_Veit_, _veizt_, _vitum_, _vissi_. Danish _ved_, _vide_, _vidste_. Observe the form _vidste_; since, in it, the d of the root (in spelling, at least) is preserved. The t of the Anglo-Saxon _wiste_ is the t, not of the root, but of the inflection. In respect to the four forms in question, viz., _wit_, _wot_, _wiss_, _wisst_, the first seems to be the root; the second a strong præterite regularly formed, but used (like οἶδα in Greek) with a present sense; the third a weak præterite, of which the -t has been ejected by a euphonic process, used also with a present sense; the fourth is a second singular from _wiss_ after the manner of _wert_ from _were_, a second singular from _wit_ after the manner of _must_, a secondary præterite from _wiss_, or finally, the form _wisse_, anterior to the operation of the euphonic process that ejected the -t.