No, I'm pretty sure he meant just for such words as τοιοῦτον.
My Greek study book (written in Hebrew) had for the neuter τοιοῦτο with
no -ν form in parenthesis or footnote. Then again, despite being an Attic Greek study book,
it has ἔστων for the 3rd pl. imperative of είμί, where Attic had ὄντων,
and non-enclitic ἔστε for the 2nd pl., where Attic just used the enclitic ind. ἐστέ.
βασιλεῖς (and only in parenthesis βασιλῆς) for nom.pl. where in Attic, up to 329B.C. according to Smyth,
the regular form was βασιλῆς. and so on...