The plural suffix _-en_, as in _haly-en_, holy ones, saints, is due to the fact that Southern admitted the use of that suffix very freely, as in _cherch-en_, churches, _sterr-en_, stars, etc.; whilst Northern only admitted five such plurals, viz.

_egh-en_, _ey-en_, eyes (Shakespeare's _eyne_), _hos-en_, stockings, _ox-en_, _shoo-n_, shoes, and _f{-a}-n_, foes; _ox-en_ being the sole survivor, since _shoon_ (as in _Hamlet_, IV iv 26) is archaic.

The modern _child-r-en_, _breth-r-en_, are really double plurals; Northern employed the more original forms _childer_ and _brether_, both of which, and especially the former, are still in dialectal use.

_Evrelest-inde_ exhibits the Southern _-inde_ for present participles.
But the word _zennes_, sins, exhibits a peculiarity that is almost solely Kentish, and seldom found elsewhere, viz.

the use of _e_ for _i_.