Regular verbs of the default class are distinguished from regular verbs of the j-class on the basis of of some systematic differences in their paradigms. Regular verbs of the j-class have infinitives ending in -je. Regular verbs of the default class have an infinitival ending which also ends in schwa, like the j-class, but the schwa is not preceded by a /j/. Any consonant may precede the schwa of the default class, except the /j/. So the first difference between the two classes of regular verbs concerns the infinitival ending: is the schwa preceded by /j/ or by another consonant.

The second difference between the j-class and the default class concerns the use of bases to host inflectional endings. Both classes have two base forms for hosting inflectional endings. There are two base forms for regular verbs:

• the full base form
• the reduced base form

Full and reduced forms are formed on the basis of the infinitive. Full forms are identical to the infinitive. Reduced forms are found by dropping the class marker.

• The class marker of the default class is schwa.
• The class marker of the j-class is j.

The reduced base forms are found by dropping the class marker. An example of a full form of the default class is: bruke ‘use’. The reduced base form of the default class can be found by dropping its class marker. Thus the reduced base form of bruke ‘use’ drops its class marker schwa, yielding: bruuk. An example of a full form of the j-class is: koopje ‘buy’. The reduced base form of the j-class can be found by dropping its class marker. Thus the reduced base form of koopje ‘buy’ drops the class marker /j/, yielding: kope. The examples of the full and reduced base forms are repeated in the scheme below:

	Full base	Reduced base
Default class of verbs	bruke	bruuk
J-class of verbs	koopje	kope

Let us now turn to the present tense of the two verb classes, which are given below, together with the pattern covering the inflectional paradigms of the two classes in one statement:

FRANK HEADER Default class of regular verbs, present tense:

The difference between the two verb classes has now been dealt with in the rules for the formation of the full and reduced base forms. These rules in turn only refer to the notion of verb class marker. Thus the two regular verb classes have the same inflectional paradigm, and any apparent difference is the result of the presence or absence of the verb class marker (schwa versus /j/). Let us now turn to the past tense.

From a syntactic point of view, this is all that needs to be said about the conjugation of the two classes of regular verbs. There are some morpho-phonological assimilations applying in the past tense, for which the reader is referred to the section on the morphology of Saterland Frisian. The imperative of the two verb classes can be described in the same way. Consider the form of the imperative in the singular and the plural for the two verb classes.

Thus we see that the two regular verb classes can be described by means of one pattern. In colloquial speech, the singular imperative forms of the J-class may easily lose their final schwa, so that the same speaker may use both forms with and without schwa. If the imperative singular of the je-class doesn’t have a schwa, it basically follows the pattern of the default class.

Let us now turn to the irregular verbs. These verbs differ from regular verbs in that they may have more than one reduced base. Furthermore, the irregularity of irregular verbs is mostly that their reduced base forms are less regular than in the case of regular verbs. There are even some irregular verbs of which the reduced base forms are completely irregular. If there is no relation of similarity at all between a full base form and a reduced base form, then almost always suppletion is involved. In addition, there are a few instances of irregular verbs featuring irregularity in their inflectional ending, but that is rare. The bulk of the irregularity of irregular verbs is taken care of in the choice of their reduced base forms. Consider the conjugation of the irregular verb boake ‘bake’.

The irregularity of boake ‘bake’ is that it has a reduced base form in the present, which is irregular: bak. The scheme in (4) now suffices to describe the conjugation of this irregular verb in the present tense. Indeed, regular and most irregular verbs thus share the same inflectional paradigm in the present tense, as described in (4). A handful of verbs is truly irregular, such as weze ‘to be’, which has a 3SG form which doesn’t even end in –t. But even for the verb of being, there are subregularities, which need not concern us here. Consider next the past tense of the verb boake ‘bake’.

This irregular verbs differs from regular ones in having two reduced bases. The reduced base for the present tense is bak-, the reduced base (marked 2) for the past tense is buuk-. The perfect participle is based on the full verb form. Another difference concerns the past tense, where the regular verbs use the suffix -de, whereas the irregular verbs do not use this suffix. As for the perfect participle, irregular verbs may feature a perfect participle in –d, like the regular verbs, but the ending -n is also found, depending on the verb involved. All verbs thus have a perfect participle which either ends in -n or in -d (or -t as a phonological alternant). Thus we have given a broad outline of the system there is to the verb paradigm, and we have shown that many generalisations apply both to regular and (most or all) irregular verbs.