_The expression of_ TENSE or TIME _in the Syllogistic Forms_. Seeing that the Copula in S is P or S is in P does not express time, but only a certain relation between S and P, the question arises Where are we to put time in the analytic formula? "Wheat is dear;" "All had fled;" time is expressed in these propositions, and our formula should render the whole content of what is given. Are we to include it in the Predicate term or in the Subject term? If it must not be left out altogether, and we cannot put it with the copula, we have a choice between the two terms. It is a purely scholastic question. The common technical treatment is to view the tense as part of the predicate. "All had fled," All S is P, _i.e._, the whole subject is included in a class constituted on the attributes of flight at a given time. It may be that the Predicate is solely a predicate of time. "The Board met yesterday at noon." S is P, _i.e._, the meeting of the Board is one of the events characterised by having happened at a certain time, agreeing with other events in that respect. But in some cases the time is more properly regarded as part of the subject. _E.g._, "Wheat is dear". S does not here stand for wheat collectively, but for the wheat now in the market, the wheat of the present time: it is concerning this that the attribute of dearness is predicated; it is this that is in the class of dear things. _The expression of_ MODALITY _in the Syllogistic Forms_. Propositions in which the predicate is qualified by an expression of necessity, contingency, possibility or impossibility [_i.e._, in English by _must_, _may_, _can_, or _cannot_], were called in Mediaeval Logic _Modal_ Propositions. "Two and two _must_ make four." "Grubs _may_ become butterflies." "Z _can_ paint." "Y _cannot_ fly." There are two recognised ways of reducing such propositions to the form S is P. One is to distinguish between the _Dictum_ and the _Mode_, the proposition and the qualification of its certainty, and to treat the _Dictum_ as the Subject and the _Mode_ as the Predicate. Thus: "That two and two make four is necessary"; "That Y can fly is impossible". The other way is to treat the Mode as part of the predicate. The propriety of this is not obvious in the case of Necessary propositions, but it is unobjectionable in the case of the other three modes. Thus: "Grubs are things that have the potentiality of becoming butterflies"; "Z has the faculty of painting"; "Y has not the faculty of flying".