_Moeso-Gothic_ meina = _mei_ _as_ opposed to meins = _meus_. theina = _tui_ " theins = _tuus_. _Old High German_ m[^i]n = _mei_ " m[^i]ner = _meus_. d[^i]n = _tui_ " d[^i]ner = _tuus_. _Old Norse_ min = _mei_ " minn = _meus_. thin=_tui_ " thinn = _tuus_. _Middle Dutch_ m[^i]ns = _mei_ " m[^i]n = _meus_. d[^i]ns = _tui_ " d[^i]n = tuus. _Modern High German_ mein = _mei_ " meiner = meus. dein = _tui_ " deiner = tuus. In this list, those languages where the two forms are alike are not exhibited. This is the case with the Anglo-Saxon and Old Saxon. In the above-noticed differences of form lie the best reasons for the assumption of a genitive case, as the origin of an adjectival form; and, undoubtedly, in those languages, where both forms occur, it is convenient to consider one as a case and one as an adjective. s. 458. But this is not the present question. In Anglo-Saxon there is but one form, _min_ and _thin_=_mei_ and _meus_, _tui_ and _tuus_, indifferently. Is this form an oblique case or an adjective? This involves two sorts of evidence. s. 459. _Etymological evidence._--Assuming two _powers_ for the words _min_ and _thin_, one genitive, and one adjectival, which is the original one? or, going beyond the Anglo-Saxon, assuming that of two _forms_ like _meina_ and _meins_, the one has been derived from the other, which is the primitive, radical, primary, or original one? Men, from whom it is generally unsafe to differ, consider that the adjectival form is the derived one; and, as far as forms like _m[^i]ner_, as opposed to _m[^i]n_, are concerned, the evidence of the foregoing list is in their favour. But what is the case with the Middle Dutch? The genitive _m[^i]ns_ is evidently the derivative of _m[^i]n_. The reason why the forms like _m[^i]ner_ seem derived is because they are longer and more complex than the others. Nevertheless, it is by no means an absolute rule in philology that the least compound form is the oldest. A word may be {387} adapted to a secondary meaning by a change in its parts in the way of omission, as well as by a change in the way of addition. Such is the general statement. Reasons for believing that in the particular cases of the words in question such is the fact, will be found hereafter. As to the question whether it is most likely for an adjective to be derived from a case, or a case from an adjective, it may be said, that philology furnishes instances both ways. _Ours_ is a case derived, in syntax at least, from an adjective. _Cujus_ (as in _cujum pecus_) and _sestertium_ are Latin instances of a nominative case being evolved from an oblique one.