PREDICATIVE INFINITIVE WITH VERBS OF MOTION AND REST. 195 
gieng fliehen = floh), C. 136.23; . . . bb) den Zweck der Bewegung: Gewat 
se wilda fugel earce secan,” etc. Clearly our idiom is referred to in Koch’s first 
subdivision, which takes account of both the modal and the co-ordinate uses. 
Since in his discussion of the infinitive after verbs of motion, especially in 
his paragraph on this construction in Anglo-Saxon, Matzner 1 clumps together 
examples in which the infinitive is purely final (as in Beow. 396: Nu ge moton 
gang an . . . HroSgar geseon) with examples of the dubious sort now under 
discussion (as in Beow. 234: Gewat him <5a to waro&e wicge ridan Cegn Hro&- 
gares), it is impossible for me to be sure of his view as to the ultimate nature 
of the infinitive in question. I quote, however, his introductory comment 
(p. 16): “ Bei intransitiven Verben der Bewegung war in alterer Zeit der reine 
Infinitiv gelaufig; gegenwartig trifft man ihn noch bei go, fruher auch bei come. 
In diesem Falle bezeichnet der Infinitiv theils eine zweite Thatigkeit, welche mit 
der Bewegung verbunden ist, theils eine solche, welche ihren Zweck ausmacht.” 
Then follow examples of the sort indicated from Modern English and from 
Middle English. The paragraph on this infinitive in Anglo-Saxon is thus 
introduced (p. 17): “ Wie im Franzosischen bei alter, venir, courir und bei 
denselben Begriffen in altgermanischen Mundarten, steht auch im Ags. bei 
gangan, gewitan, cuman, faran, feran haufig der reine Infinitiv.’’ Then follow 
examples from Anglo-Saxon, specimens of which I have already quoted. Then 
comes this concluding paragraph concerning the infinitive after verbs of motion 
in English of the three epochs: “ Dass in den angefiihrten Beispielen theils 
eine mit der Bewegung zeitlich zusammenfallende Bethatigung, theils eine der 
Bewegung folgende und durch sie erzielte Handlung dargestellt wird, ergiebt 
sich leicht; wie aber beide Verhaltnisse oft thatsachlich nahe an einander 
grenzen und selbst in einander iibergehen, so ist beiden syntaktisch dieselbe Form 
zu Theil geworden, worm die Bewegung gleichmassig als die Voraussetzung 
einer anderen Handlung erscheint. Wo der begriff des Zweckes hervorgehoben 
wird, tritt auch in friihester Zeit schon to zum Infinitiv, woriiber beim prapo- 
sitionalen Infinitiv gehandelt wird.” (Cf. ibidem, p. 38.) He seems, also, to 
attribute to our infinitive both the modal and the co-ordinate uses. 
Professor March, in his A Comparative Grammar of the Anglo-Saxon Language 
(1869), § 448 (4), under “ Direct Object,” speaks of this use of the infinitive 
as follows: “ General motion defined by specific motion: fleon gewat, 1 he 
went to fly ’ = 1 he flew away’ (C. 136, 23); com fleogan, ‘ came flying ’ (89,10); 
com gongan (B. 710); com drifan, 1 came driving ’ = ‘ fell (on a rock) ’ (Bed., 
5, 6); so with faran, feran, glidan, ridan, scri&an, sioian, tredan, etc. See 
further under Participles, § 458, 2.” This section on the participle deserves 
quoting, as throwing some light on the statement just quoted concerning the 
infinitive. In § 458, under the heading “ Objective,” we read in (2): “ Defini¬ 
tive after verbs of motion: com ridende, i came riding ’ (Horn., 2, 134); com 
gangende (Matt., XIV, 25, and often); cwom gefered (Sal., 178; perhaps never 
exactly the Germ, ham gegangen); wind wedende fcereft (EL, 1274); fturhwunedon 
acsiende, ‘ they continued asking ’ (John, VIII, 7).” 2 It may be, however, 
that Professor March, by his translation of fleon gewat as u he went to fly ” 
1 Englische Grammatik (1865), Vol. Ill, pp. 16-17; my quotation is from the third ed. (1880). 
2 Of these examples only the first two seem to me strictly analogous in use with the infinitive under dis¬ 
cussion. Gefered is excluded as being a past participle; wedende is more a participial adverb than an adverbial 
participle, as I have tried to show in my The Appositive Participle in Anglo-Saxon, p. 275; while acsiende is in 
sense utterly different from the infinitives like gangan, fleogan, etc. 
