In Early New English the uses of must are often associated with the use of the adverb needs, rendering the meaning of necessity – necessarily, etc.
The verb will/would, formally anomalous, now approaches the modals. As in older times it does not take the 3rd person singular personal ending, the infinitive usually associated with it is bare, and in its uses it has very much in common with the other modals. However in the early XVII century very often it is used as a notional verb. This is especially evident in such uses of the form would in the subjunctive where would like in present-day English is more common.
The number of basic forms of the former strong is reduced to three: that of the infinitive, past tense and Participle II. Class VI and VII in older times had this pattern already from the times of Old English - in other classes past singular and past plural had different root vowels. This change lacked regularity - some of the verbs preserved the first, the second and the fourth forms with the participle suffix -en (write - wrote - written), some lost the suffix (ride - rode - rid), the past form and the participle of still other were identical and the second or the third form was used as the basis (bind -bound - bound). We may find instances when Participle II has no suffix, whereas adjectivized participle has it (drink - drank - drunk, but drunken), or when a verb and its derivative differ in the formation of Participle II (get -got - got, but forget - forgot - forgotten, the American variant preserves the suffix with both). In early New English there is still much uncertainty in many verbs.
The non-finite forms of the verb - the infinitive, the participle and the gerund developed the set of forms and can hardly be called now the nominal parts of speech. Passive and perfect infinitives, passive and perfect gerund, W lent participle in the passive voice and perfect participle in the active and the passive voice fully represent new verbal grammatical categories.
The gerund that originated and was occasionally used in Middle English becomes quite common, the use of this form does not differ from the present- day practice.
The categories of the Early New English remain basically the same: tense, voice, time correlation (perfect), mood.The categories of number and person are less distinct and expressed in the personal ending of the 3rd person singular in the present tense active voice and in the passive voice, as the vei I to be retains its 1st person singular and two number forms in the past.
All forms of the perfect tenses are abundantly used in Early New English. Occasionally the perfect tenses of the intransitive verbs are formed with the auxiliary to be but the forms with the auxiliary have are also found.
The moods of the Early New English period are the same as they were in the Middle English - the Indicative, the Imperative and Subjunctive. The newly arisen analytical forms of the Subjunctive (now in some grammars they are called the Conditional, the Suppositional and Subjunctive II Past) have not yet the present-day differentiation as to the rules of the structural limitation of their use. We may find any combination of the moods in the sentences of unreal condition.
There is another difference in the use of the former Present tense of the Subjunctive Mood (which now is commonly called Subjunctive I). It is widely used in the texts, in sentences expressing wishes. Subjunctive I is also widespread in other types of clauses, where in present-day English we have Suppositional Mood (should + Infinitive) and in American variant the older archaic form is preserved: Notably, the sentences of what we call now those of real condition prevalently have Subjunctive I in the subordinate clause.
The continuous aspect, the first instances of which were used in Middle English is occasionally used in the texts of this period, though not as a system (in a typical situation in which this form is used now, to denote the action that takes place at the moment of speech it is not used by Shakespeare)