The rise of do-forms

In the early NE a new set of analytical forms which entered the paradigms of the Pres.&Past Tense of the Indicative Mood was developed:interrogative&negatives forms with the auxiliary verb “do”.these forms are known as do-periphrasis.In ME the verb don was used ogether with an Inf.to express a causative meaning.In the early NE the causative meaningpassed to a similar verb phrase with “make”,while the perphrasis with do began to be employed instead of simple,synthetic forms.At 1st the do-perephrasis was more frequent in poetry.The use of do enabled the author to have an extra syll.in the line/Then it spread to all kinds of texts.In 16&17c the periphrasis with do was used in all types of sentences-negative,affirmative&interrogative;it freely interchanged with the simple form,without do.In the end of17 c he use of simple forms&the do—pre became more differentiated:do was found mainly in negative statements&?,the simple forms-in affirmative statements.The do-pre turned into analytical negative&interrogative forms of simple forms:presn&past.When word oder became fixed,&the pedicate

Of the centence followed the subject,the use of do made it possible adhere to this order in ?,for at least the notional part of the predicate could thus preserve its position after the subject.This order of words was well established in numerous sentences with analytical forms&modals phrases.In the 18 c the periphrasis with do as an equivalent of the simple form in affirmative statements fell into disuse(its employment in affirmative sentences acquired a stylistic function:it made the statement emphatic)

The rise of the future forms.

In OE category of tense consisted of Pr.& Past. Pr could indicate pr & fut actions. Fut happenings were also presented:modal phrases(v sculan, willan, magan, cunnan) & Infinitive of the notional verb. The meaning of fut was combined with strong modal meaning.

ME shall+inf=the principle means of indicating fut in any context. Shall retained its modal meaning of necessity, but weakened it so that phrase denoted pure futurity; willen+inf=also expressed fut, but the meaning of volition was more obvious than the modal meaning of shall.

Shakespeare’s age-shall/will outnumbered all the other ways of indicating fut. 17cent. John Wallis formulated the rule about regular interchange depending on person, which proves that the semantic diff b/n the 2 auxiliary v was slight. End of 17-constructive form ‘ll.