It will be seen that in the English almost all likeness to the Sanskrit terminations has been lost. Our verb ‘to be’ is very irregular, being, in fact, a mixture of several distinct verbs. The Anglo-Saxon had the verb _beó_ contracted from _beom_ (here we have at least the _m-_ ending for I), I am, _byst_, thou art, _bydh_, he is, and the same appear in the German _bin_, _bist_. It is, of course, very difficult to trace the remains of the meaningless additions in such advanced languages as ours, or even in such as Sanskrit, Latin, and Greek. Nevertheless, the reader may find it not uninteresting to trace in the Latin through most of the tenses of verbs these endings--_m_, for I, the first person; _s_, for thou, the second person; _t_, for he, the third person; _m-s_, for I and thou, we; _st_, for ye, thou and he, ye; _nt_, for they. And the same reader must be content to take on trust the fact that other additions corresponding to different tenses can also be shown or reasonably guessed to have been words expressive by themselves of the idea which belongs to the particular tense; so that where we have such a tense as-- _amabam_ I was loving, _amabas_ thou wast loving, _amabat_, _etc._ he was loving, we may recognize the meaning of the component parts thus:-- _ama-ba-m_ love-was-I. _ama-ba-s_ love-was-thou. _ama-ba-t_ love-was-he. Of course, really to show the way in which these meaningless additions have been made and come to be amalgamated with the root, we should have to take examples from a great number of languages in different stages of development. But we have thought it easier, for mere explanation, to take only such languages as were likely to be familiar to the reader, and even to supplement these examples with imaginary ones--like ‘rock-on,’ ‘love-was-I,’ etc.--in English. For our object has been at first merely to give an intelligible account of how language has been formed, of the different stages it has passed through, and to leave to a future time the question as to which languages of the globe have passed through all these stages, and which have gone part of their way in the formation of a perfect language. Between the state of a language in which the meaning of all the separate parts of a word are recognized and that state where they are entirely lost, there is an immense gap, that indeed which separates the most from the least advanced languages of the world. [Sidenote: Monosyllabic Language.]