ADDENDA. 
337 
“ ** Indicating objectivity,” in which the inflected infinitive is “dependent 
on various verbs, chiefly transitive, passive, or reflexive, with weakened sense 
of purpose/’ on various adjectives, and on various abstract substantives (as 
nouns of action). 
“*** Indicating appointment or destination/’ in which the infinitive is 
dependent on verb, adjective, or substantive. No example is given from 
Anglo-Saxon, the earliest in the Dictionary dating from 1380. 
“ **** Indicating result or consequence,” especially after so, such , enough , 
too. No example is given from Anglo-Saxon; 1 but see Chapter XII, pp. 162 ff. 
above, where numerous examples are given of the consecutive infinitive in 
Anglo-Saxon. 
“***** Indicating occasion or condition,” which corresponds to my in¬ 
finitive of cause and my infinitive of specification: see Chapters XII and XI, 
pp. 160 f. and 149 ff. The Dictionary’s earliest example of the causal infinitive 
is from the fourteenth century {The Seven Sages and Chaucer). Under this 
heading, the Dictionary includes, also, the conditional use of the infinitive, of 
which, however, no example has been found in Anglo-Saxon by the author 
of the article on to or by myself: see p. 171 above. 
Clearly the chief difference between the classification of the Dictionary 
and of the present monograph, in group I, arises from the inclusion by the 
former of certain infinitives modifying substantives, concerning which this 
explanation is offered on p. 88 (lc): “The adverbial use may be explained as 
qualifying the adjective 1 intended, adapted’ before to .” While not denying 
the permissibility, perhaps even the desirability, of this subdivision, I am 
inclined to believe that, in some of the Anglo-Saxon examples quoted, the 
infinitive is adjectival rather than adverbial in use. 
But, under “II. With infinitive in adjectival relation” (pp. 88-89), the 
Dictionary includes not only the infinitive immediately modifying a noun, as 
in Greg. 127.1, 2 (gif bser bonne sie gierd mid to Sreageanne, sie baer eac stcef mid 
to wreSianne), but also the infinitive used “as predicate after the verb to he ” 
and “expressing duty, obligation, or necessity,” as in Chron. 215/ 1083 E (ba 
munecas . . . nyston hwet heom to donne wcere). As was stated on p. 5 
above, the infinitive of necessity is by most scholars 2 put under the predicative 
(or more verbal) use; nor does the Dictionary seem to me to justify its de¬ 
parture here from the general custom. The subdivisions of group II, as given 
by the Dictionary , are: — 
“a. Expressing intention or appointment (cf. I, 6), and hence simple 
futurity (thus equivalent to a future participle),” as in Greg. 127.1, 2 above. 
See, too, Chapter XIII, pp. 173 ff., above. 
“b. Expressing duty, obligation, or necessity,” as in Chron. 215/ 1083 E 
above. 
“c. Expressing possibility or potential action,” of which the following is 
given as an example in Anglo-Saxon: — Mlj. Hept.: Gen. 28.20: Gif Drihten 
. . . sylb me hlaf to etenne and reaf to werigenne. 
“d. Expressing quality or character,” of which no example is given from 
Anglo-Saxon, the earliest in the Dictionary belonging to the fifteenth century. 
“12. With infinitive equivalent to a relative clause with indicative; chiefly 
3 The earliest example in the Dictionary is from 1300 (A Sarmun). 
2 Mr. Onions, however, l. c., § 169, puts this infinitive under the adverbial use. 
