diff options
Diffstat (limited to '32856-tei')
| -rw-r--r-- | 32856-tei/32856-tei.tei | 18895 |
1 files changed, 18895 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/32856-tei/32856-tei.tei b/32856-tei/32856-tei.tei new file mode 100644 index 0000000..e9249be --- /dev/null +++ b/32856-tei/32856-tei.tei @@ -0,0 +1,18895 @@ +<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?> + +<!DOCTYPE TEI.2 SYSTEM "http://www.gutenberg.org/tei/marcello/0.4/dtd/pgtei.dtd" [ + +<!ENTITY u5 "http://www.tei-c.org/Lite/"> + +]> + +<TEI.2 lang="en"> +<teiHeader> + <fileDesc> + <titleStmt> + <title>Lectures on The Science of Language</title> + <author><name reg="Müller, Max">Max Müller</name></author> + </titleStmt> + <editionStmt> + <edition n="2">Edition 2</edition> + </editionStmt> + <publicationStmt> + <publisher>Project Gutenberg</publisher> + <date>June 17, 2010</date> + <idno type="etext-no">32856</idno> + <availability> + <p>This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and + with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it + away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg + License online at www.gutenberg.org/license</p> + </availability> + </publicationStmt> + <sourceDesc> + <bibl> + Created electronically. + </bibl> + </sourceDesc> + </fileDesc> + <encodingDesc> + </encodingDesc> + <profileDesc> + <langUsage> + <language id="en"></language> + <language id="fr"></language> + <language id="el"></language> + </langUsage> + </profileDesc> + <revisionDesc> + <change> + <date value="2010-06-17">June 17, 2010</date> + <respStmt> + <name> + Produced by Barbara Tozier, Bill Tozier, David King, and the Online + Distributed Proofreading Team at <http://www.pgdp.net/>. + </name> + </respStmt> + <item>Project Gutenberg TEI edition 1</item> + </change> + </revisionDesc> +</teiHeader> + +<pgExtensions> + <pgStyleSheet> + .boxed { x-class: boxed } + .shaded { x-class: shaded } + .rules { x-class: rules; rules: all } + .indent { margin-left: 2 } + .bold { font-weight: bold } + .italic { font-style: italic } + .smallcaps { font-variant: small-caps } + </pgStyleSheet> + + <pgCharMap formats="txt.iso-8859-1"> + <char id="U0x2014"> + <charName>mdash</charName> + <desc>EM DASH</desc> + <mapping>--</mapping> + </char> + <char id="U0x2003"> + <charName>emsp</charName> + <desc>EM SPACE</desc> + <mapping> </mapping> + </char> + <char id="U0x2026"> + <charName>hellip</charName> + <desc>HORIZONTAL ELLIPSIS</desc> + <mapping>...</mapping> + </char> + </pgCharMap> +</pgExtensions> + +<text lang="en"> + <front> + <div> + <divGen type="pgheader" /> + </div> + <div> + <divGen type="encodingDesc" /> + </div> + + <div rend="page-break-before: always"> + <p rend="font-size: x-large; text-align: center">Lectures on</p> + <p rend="font-size: xx-large; text-align: center">The Science of Language</p> + <p rend="text-align: center">Delivered At The</p> + <p rend="font-size: large; text-align: center">Royal Institution of Great Britain</p> + <p rend="text-align: center">In</p> + <p rend="font-size: large; text-align: center">April, May, and June, 1861.</p> + <p rend="font-size: x-large; text-align: center">By Max Müller, M. A.</p> + <p rend="text-align: center">Fellow of All Souls College, Oxford; Correspondence Member of the Imperial Institute of France.</p> + <p rend="text-align: center">From the Second London Edition, Revised.</p> + <p rend="text-align: center">New York:</p> + <p rend="text-align: center">Charles Scribner, 124 Grand Street.</p> + <p rend="text-align: center">1862</p> + </div> + <div rend="page-break-before: always"> + <head>Contents</head> + <divGen type="toc" /> + </div> + + </front> +<body> + +<pb n='v'/><anchor id='Pgv'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Dedication</head> + +<p> +Dedicated +</p> + +<p> +To +</p> + +<p> +The Members Of The University Of Oxford, +</p> + +<p> +Both Resident And Non-Resident, +</p> + +<p> +To Whom I Am Indebted +</p> + +<p> +For Numerous Proofs Of Sympathy And Kindness +</p> + +<p> +During The Last Twelve Years, +</p> + +<p> +In Grateful Acknowledgment Of Their Generous Support +</p> + +<p> +On The +</p> + +<p> +7th Of December, 1860. +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='vii'/><anchor id='Pgvii'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Preface.</head> + +<p> +My Lectures on the Science of Language are here +printed as I had prepared them in manuscript for the +Royal Institution. When I came to deliver them, a +considerable portion of what I had written had to be +omitted; and, in now placing them before the public in +a more complete form, I have gladly complied with a +wish expressed by many of my hearers. As they are, +they only form a short abstract of several Courses +delivered from time to time in Oxford, and they do not +pretend to be more than an introduction to a science +far too comprehensive to be treated successfully in so +small a compass. +</p> + +<p> +My object, however, will have been attained, if I +should succeed in attracting the attention, not only +of the scholar, but of the philosopher, the historian, +and the theologian, to a science which concerns them +all, and which, though it professes to treat of words +only, teaches us that there is more in words than is +dreamt of in our philosophy. I quote from Bacon: +<q>Men believe that their reason is lord over their +<pb n='viii'/><anchor id='Pgviii'/> +words, but it happens, too, that words exercise a +reciprocal and reactionary power over our intellect. +Words, as a Tartar's bow, shoot back upon the understanding +of the wisest, and mightily entangle and pervert +the judgment.</q> +</p> + +<p> +MAX MÜLLER. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Oxford</hi>, June 11, 1861. +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='011'/><anchor id='Pg011'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Lecture I. The Science Of Language One Of The Physical +Sciences.</head> + +<p> +When I was asked some time ago to deliver a +course of lectures on Comparative Philology in this +Institution, I at once expressed my readiness to do so. +I had lived long enough in England to know that the +peculiar difficulties arising from my imperfect knowledge +of the language would be more than balanced by +the forbearance of an English audience, and I had +such perfect faith in my subject that I thought it might +be trusted even in the hands of a less skilful expositor. +I felt convinced that the researches into the history of +languages and into the nature of human speech which +have been carried on for the last fifty years in England, +France, and Germany, deserved a larger share +of public sympathy than they had hitherto received; +and it seemed to me, as far as I could judge, that +the discoveries in this newly-opened mine of scientific +inquiry were not inferior, whether in novelty or +importance, to the most brilliant discoveries of our +age. +</p> + +<pb n='012'/><anchor id='Pg012'/> + +<p> +It was not till I began to write my lectures that I +became aware of the difficulties of the task I had +undertaken. The dimensions of the science of language +are so vast that it is impossible in a course of +nine lectures to give more than a very general survey +of it; and as one of the greatest charms of this science +consists in the minuteness of the analysis by which +each language, each dialect, each word, each grammatical +form is tested, I felt that it was almost impossible +to do full justice to my subject, or to place the achievements +of those who founded and fostered the science +of language in their true light. Another difficulty +arises from the dryness of many of the problems which +I shall have to discuss. Declensions and conjugations +cannot be made amusing, nor can I avail myself of +the advantages possessed by most lecturers, who enliven +their discussions by experiments and diagrams. +If, with all these difficulties and drawbacks, I do not +shrink from opening to-day this course of lectures on +mere words, on nouns and verbs and particles,—if I +venture to address an audience accustomed to listen, in +this place, to the wonderful tales of the natural historian, +the chemist, and geologist, and wont to see the +novel results of inductive reasoning invested by native +eloquence, with all the charms of poetry and romance,—it +is because, though mistrusting myself, I cannot +mistrust my subject. The study of words may be +tedious to the school-boy, as breaking of stones is to +the wayside laborer; but to the thoughtful eye of the +geologist these stones are full of interest;—he sees +miracles on the high-road, and reads chronicles in every +ditch. Language, too, has marvels of her own, which +she unveils to the inquiring glance of the patient +<pb n='013'/><anchor id='Pg013'/> +student. There are chronicles below her surface; +there are sermons in every word. Language has +been called sacred ground, because it is the deposit +of thought. We cannot tell as yet what language is. +It may be a production of nature, a work of human +art, or a divine gift. But to whatever sphere it belongs, +it would seem to stand unsurpassed—nay, +unequalled in it—by anything else. If it be a production +of nature, it is her last and crowning production +which she reserved for man alone. If it be a +work of human art, it would seem to lift the human +artist almost to the level of a divine creator. If it be +the gift of God, it is God's greatest gift; for through +it God spake to man and man speaks to God in worship, +prayer, and meditation. +</p> + +<p> +Although the way which is before us may be long +and tedious, the point to which it tends would seem to +be full of interest; and I believe I may promise that +the view opened before our eyes from the summit of +our science, will fully repay the patient travellers, and +perhaps secure a free pardon to their venturous guide. +</p> + +<milestone unit='tb' rend='rule: 50%'/> + +<p> +The Science of Language is a science of very modern +date. We cannot trace its lineage much beyond +the beginning of our century, and it is scarcely received +as yet on a footing of equality by the elder +branches of learning. Its very name is still unsettled, +and the various titles that have been given to it in +England, France, and Germany are so vague and varying +that they have led to the most confused ideas +among the public at large as to the real objects of this +new science. We hear it spoken of as Comparative +Philology, Scientific Etymology, Phonology, and Glossology. +<pb n='014'/><anchor id='Pg014'/> +In France it has received the convenient, but +somewhat barbarous, name of <foreign lang='fr' rend='italic'>Linguistique</foreign>. If we +must have a Greek title for our science, we might +derive it either from <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>mythos</foreign>, +word, or from <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>logos</foreign>, +speech. But the title of <emph>Mythology</emph> is already occupied, +and <hi rend='italic'>Logology</hi> would jar too much on classical +ears. We need not waste our time in criticising these +names, as none of them has as yet received that universal +sanction which belongs to the titles of other +modern sciences, such as Geology or Comparative +Anatomy; nor will there be much difficulty in christening +our young science after we have once ascertained +its birth, its parentage, and its character. I +myself prefer the simple designation of the Science +of Language, though in these days of high-sounding +titles, this plain name will hardly meet with general +acceptance. +</p> + +<p> +From the name we now turn to the meaning of our +science. But before we enter upon a definition of its +subject-matter, and determine the method which ought +to be followed in our researches, it will be useful to cast +a glance at the history of the other sciences, among +which the science of language now, for the first time, +claims her place; and examine their origin, their +gradual progress, and definite settlement. The history +of a science is, as it were, its biography, and as +we buy experience cheapest in studying the lives of +others, we may, perhaps, guard our young science +from some of the follies and extravagances inherent +in youth by learning a lesson for which other +branches of human knowledge have had to pay more +dearly. +</p> + +<p> +There is a certain uniformity in the history of most +<pb n='015'/><anchor id='Pg015'/> +sciences. If we read such works as Whewell's History +of the Inductive Sciences or Humboldt's Cosmos, +we find that the origin, the progress, the causes +of failure and success have been the same for almost +every branch of human knowledge. There are three +marked periods or stages in the history of every one +of them, which we may call the <emph>Empirical</emph>, the <emph>Classificatory</emph>, +and the <emph>Theoretical</emph>. However humiliating +it may sound, every one of our sciences, however +grand their present titles, can be traced back to the +most humble and homely occupations of half-savage +tribes. It was not the true, the good, and the beautiful +which spurred the early philosophers to deep +researches and bold discoveries. The foundation-stone +of the most glorious structures of human ingenuity +in ages to come was supplied by the pressing +wants of a patriarchal and semi-barbarous society. +The names of some of the most ancient departments +of human knowledge tell their own tale. Geometry, +which at present declares itself free from all sensuous +impressions, and treats of its points and lines and +planes as purely ideal conceptions, not to be confounded +with those coarse and imperfect representations +as they appear on paper to the human eye; +geometry, as its very name declares, began with +measuring a garden or a field. It is derived from +the Greek <emph>gē</emph>, +land, ground, earth, and <emph>metron</emph>, measure. +Botany, the science of plants, was originally +the science of <emph>botanē</emph>, which in Greek does not +mean a plant in general, but fodder, from +<emph>boskein</emph>, to feed. +The science of plants would have been called Phytology, +from the Greek <emph>phyton</emph>, +a plant.<note place='foot'>See Jessen, Was heisst Botanik? 1861.</note> The founders +<pb n='016'/><anchor id='Pg016'/> +of Astronomy were not the poet or the philosopher, +but the sailor and the farmer. The early poet may +have admired <q>the mazy dance of planets,</q> and the +philosopher may have speculated on the heavenly harmonies; +but it was to the sailor alone that a knowledge +of the glittering guides of heaven became a +question of life and death. It was he who calculated +their risings and settings with the accuracy of a merchant +and the shrewdness of an adventurer; and the +names that were given to single stars or constellations +clearly show that they were invented by the ploughers +of the sea and of the land. The moon, for instance, +the golden hand on the dark dial of heaven, was +called by them the Measurer,—the measurer of time; +for time was measured by nights, and moons, and +winters, long before it was reckoned by days, and +suns, and years. Moon<note place='foot'>Kuhn's Zeitschrift +für Vergleichende Sprachforschung, b. ix. s. 104.</note> is a very old word. It was +<emph>môna</emph> in Anglo-Saxon, and was used there, not as a +feminine, but as a masculine; for the moon was a masculine +in all Teutonic languages, and it is only through +the influence of classical models that in English moon +has been changed into a feminine, and sun into a masculine. +It was a most unlucky assertion which Mr. Harris +made in his <hi rend='italic'>Hermes</hi>, that all nations ascribe to the +sun a masculine, and to the moon a feminine gender.<note place='foot'>Horne +Tooke, p. 27, <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</note> +In Gothic moon is <emph>mena</emph>, which is a masculine. For +month we have in A.-S. <emph>mónâdh</emph>, in Gothic +<emph>menoth</emph>, +both masculine. In Greek we find <emph>mēn</emph>, a +masculine, for month, and <emph>mēnē</emph>, +a feminine, for moon. In Latin +we have the derivative <emph>mensis</emph>, month, and in +Sanskrit we find <emph>mâs</emph> for moon, and +<emph>mâsa</emph> for month, both +<pb n='017'/><anchor id='Pg017'/> +masculine.<note place='foot'>See Curtius, Griechische Etymologie, s. +297.</note> Now this <emph>mâs</emph> in Sanskrit is clearly derived +from a root <emph>mâ</emph>, to measure, to mete. In Sanskrit, I +measure is <emph>mâ-mi</emph>; thou measurest, +<emph>mâ-si</emph>; he measures, +<emph>mâ-ti</emph> (or <emph>mimî-te</emph>). An +instrument of measuring is called in Sanskrit <emph>mâ-tram</emph>, +the Greek <emph>metron</emph>, our +metre. Now if the moon was originally called by the +farmer the measurer, the ruler of days, and weeks, and +seasons, the regulator of the tides, the lord of their +festivals, and the herald of their public assemblies, it +is but natural that he should have been conceived as a +man, and not as the love-sick maiden which our modern +sentimental poetry has put in his place. +</p> + +<p> +It was the sailor who, before intrusting his life and +goods to the winds and the waves of the ocean, watched +for the rising of those stars which he called the Sailing-stars +or <hi rend='italic'>Pleiades</hi>, from <emph>plein</emph>, to sail. +Navigation in the Greek waters was considered safe after the return of +the Pleiades; and it closed when they disappeared. +The Latin name for the <hi rend='italic'>Pleiades</hi> is +<emph>Vergiliæ</emph>, from +<emph>virga</emph>, a sprout or twig. This name was given to +them by the Italian husbandman, because in Italy, +where they became visible about May, they marked +the return of summer.<note place='foot'>Ideler, Handbuch der +Chronologie, b. i. s. 241, 242.</note> Another constellation, the +seven stars in the head of Taurus, received the name +of <hi rend='italic'>Hyades</hi> or <emph>Pluviæ</emph> +in Latin, because at the time +when they rose with the sun they were supposed to +announce rain. The astronomer retains these and +many other names; he still speaks of the pole of +heaven, of wandering and fixed stars,<note place='foot'>As early +as the times of Anaximenes of the Ionic, and Alcmæon of the +Pythagorean, schools, the stars had been divided into travelling (ἄστρα +πλανώμενα or πλανητά), and non-travelling stars (ἀπλανεῖς ἀστέρες, or +ἀπλανῆ ἄστρα). Aristotle first used ἄστρα ἐνδεδεμένα, or fixed stars. (See +Humboldt, Cosmos, vol. iii. p. 28.) Πόλος, the pivot, hinge, or the pole of +the heaven.</note> but he is apt +<pb n='018'/><anchor id='Pg018'/> +to forget that these terms were not the result of scientific +observation and classification, but were borrowed +from the language of those who themselves were wanderers +on the sea or in the desert, and to whom the +fixed stars were in full reality what their name implies, +stars driven in and fixed, by which they might hold +fast on the deep, as by heavenly anchors. +</p> + +<p> +But although historically we are justified in saying +that the first geometrician was a ploughman, the first +botanist a gardener, the first mineralogist a miner, it +may reasonably be objected that in this early stage a +science is hardly a science yet: that measuring a field +is not geometry, that growing cabbages is very far +from botany, and that a butcher has no claim to the +title of comparative anatomist. This is perfectly true, +yet it is but right that each science should be reminded +of these its more humble beginnings, and of the practical +requirements which it was originally intended to +answer. A science, as Bacon says, should be a rich +storehouse for the glory of God, and the relief of +man's estate. Now, although it may seem as if in +the present high state of our society students were +enabled to devote their time to the investigation of +the facts and laws of nature, or to the contemplation +of the mysteries of the world of thought, without any +side-glance at the practical result of their labors, no +science and no art have long prospered and flourished +among us, unless they were in some way subservient +to the practical interests of society. It is true that a +<pb n='019'/><anchor id='Pg019'/> +Lyell collects and arranges, a Faraday weighs and +analyzes, an Owen dissects and compares, a Herschel +observes and calculates, without any thought of the +immediate marketable results of their labors. But +there is a general interest which supports and enlivens +their researches, and that interest depends on the practical +advantages which society at large derives from +their scientific studies. Let it be known that the successive +strata of the geologist are a deception to the +miner, that the astronomical tables are useless to the +navigator, that chemistry is nothing but an expensive +amusement, of no use to the manufacturer and the farmer—and +astronomy, chemistry, and geology would +soon share the fate of alchemy and astrology. As long +as the Egyptian science excited the hopes of the invalid +by mysterious prescriptions (I may observe by the way +that the hieroglyphic signs of our modern prescriptions +have been traced back by Champollion to the real +hieroglyphics of Egypt<note place='foot'>Bunsen's Egypt, vol. +iv. p. 108.</note>)—and as long as it instigated +the avarice of its patrons by the promise of the +discovery of gold, it enjoyed a liberal support at the +courts of princes, and under the roofs of monasteries. +Though alchemy did not lead to the discovery of gold, +it prepared the way to discoveries more valuable. The +same with astrology. Astrology was not such mere +imposition as it is generally supposed to have been. It +is counted as a science by so sound and sober a scholar +as Melancthon, and even Bacon allows it a place among +the sciences, though admitting that <q>it had better intelligence +and confederacy with the imagination of man +than with his reason.</q> In spite of the strong condemnation +which Luther pronounced against astrology, +<pb n='020'/><anchor id='Pg020'/> +astrology continued to sway the destinies of Europe; +and a hundred years after Luther, the astrologer was the +counsellor of princes and generals, while the founder +of modern astronomy died in poverty and despair. In +our time the very rudiments of astrology are lost and +forgotten.<note place='foot'>According to a writer in +<q>Notes and Queries</q> (2d Series, vol. x. p. +500,) astrology is not so entirely extinct as we suppose. <q>One of our principal +writers,</q> he states, <q>one of our leading barristers, and several members +of the various antiquarian societies, are practised astrologers at this +hour. But no one cares to let his studies be known, so great is the prejudice +that confounds an art requiring the highest education with the jargon +of the gypsy fortune-teller.</q></note> Even real and useful arts, as soon as they +cease to be useful, die away, and their secrets are +sometimes lost beyond the hope of recovery. When +after the Reformation our churches and chapels were +divested of their artistic ornaments, in order to restore, +in outward appearance also, the simplicity and purity +of the Christian church, the colors of the painted windows +began to fade away, and have never regained +their former depth and harmony. The invention of +printing gave the death-blow to the art of ornamental +writing and of miniature-painting employed in the illumination +of manuscripts; and the best artists of the +present day despair of rivalling the minuteness, softness, +and brilliancy combined by the humble manufacturer +of the mediæval missal. +</p> + +<p> +I speak somewhat feelingly on the necessity that +every science should answer some practical purpose, +because I am aware that the science of language has +but little to offer to the utilitarian spirit of our age. +It does not profess to help us in learning languages +more expeditiously, nor does it hold out any hope of +ever realizing the dream of one universal language. +<pb n='021'/><anchor id='Pg021'/> +It simply professes to teach what language is, and this +would hardly seem sufficient to secure for a new science +the sympathy and support of the public at large. There +are problems, however, which, though apparently of an +abstruse and merely speculative character, have exercised +a powerful influence for good or evil in the history of +mankind. Men before now have fought for an idea, +and have laid down their lives for a word; and many +of these problems which have agitated the world from +the earliest to our own times, belong properly to the +science of language. +</p> + +<p> +Mythology, which was the bane of the ancient world, +is in truth a disease of language. A myth means a +word, but a word which, from being a name or an attribute, +has been allowed to assume a more substantial +existence. Most of the Greek, the Roman, the Indian, +and other heathen gods are nothing but poetical names, +which were gradually allowed to assume a divine personality +never contemplated by their original inventors. +<emph>Eos</emph> was a name of the dawn before she became a goddess, +the wife of <emph>Tithonos</emph>, or the dying day. +<emph>Fatum</emph>, +or fate, meant originally what had been spoken; and +before Fate became a power, even greater than Jupiter, +it meant that which had once been spoken by +Jupiter, and could never be changed,—not even by +Jupiter himself. <emph>Zeus</emph> originally meant the bright +heaven, in Sanskrit <emph>Dyaus</emph>; and many of the stories +told of him as the supreme god, had a meaning only +as told originally of the bright heaven, whose rays, +like golden rain, descend on the lap of the earth, the +<emph>Danae</emph> of old, kept by her father in the dark prison of +winter. No one doubts that <emph>Luna</emph> was simply a name +of the moon; but so was likewise <emph>Lucina</emph>, both derived +<pb n='022'/><anchor id='Pg022'/> +from <emph>lucere</emph>, to shine. +<emph>Hecate</emph>, too, was an old name of +the moon, the feminine of <emph>Hekatos</emph> and +<emph>Hekatebolos</emph>, the +far-darting sun; and <emph>Pyrrha</emph>, the Eve of the Greeks, +was nothing but a name of the red earth, and in +particular of Thessaly. This mythological disease, +though less virulent in modern languages, is by no +means extinct. +</p> + +<p> +During the Middle Ages the controversy between +Nominalism and Realism, which agitated the church +for centuries, and finally prepared the way for the +Reformation, was again, as its very name shows, a +controversy on names, on the nature of language, and +on the relation of words to our conceptions on one +side, and to the realities of the outer world on the +other. Men were called heretics for believing that +words such as <emph>justice</emph> or <emph>truth</emph> expressed only conceptions +of our mind, not real things walking about in +broad daylight. +</p> + +<p> +In modern times the science of language has been +called in to settle some of the most perplexing political +and social questions. <q>Nations and languages against +dynasties and treaties,</q> this is what has remodelled, +and will remodel still more, the map of Europe; and +in America comparative philologists have been encouraged +to prove the impossibility of a common origin of +languages and races, in order to justify, by scientific +arguments, the unhallowed theory of slavery. Never +do I remember to have seen science more degraded +than on the title-page of an American publication in +which, among the profiles of the different races of +man, the profile of the ape was made to look more +human than that of the negro. +</p> + +<p> +Lastly, the problem of the position of man on the +<pb n='023'/><anchor id='Pg023'/> +threshold between the worlds of matter and spirit has +of late assumed a very marked prominence among +the problems of the physical and mental sciences. It +has absorbed the thoughts of men who, after a long +life spent in collecting, observing, and analyzing, have +brought to its solution qualifications unrivalled in any +previous age; and if we may judge from the greater +warmth displayed in discussions ordinarily conducted +with the calmness of judges and not with the passion +of pleaders, it might seem, after all, as if the great +problems of our being, of the true nobility of our +blood, of our descent from heaven or earth, though +unconnected with anything that is commonly called +practical, have still retained a charm of their own—a +charm that will never lose its power on the mind, +and on the heart of man. Now, however much the +frontiers of the animal kingdom have been pushed forward, +so that at one time the line of demarcation between +animal and man seemed to depend on a mere +fold in the brain, there is <emph>one</emph> barrier which no one +has yet ventured to touch—the barrier of language. +Even those philosophers with whom +<emph>penser c'est sentir</emph>,<note place='foot'><q>Man +has two faculties, or two passive powers, the existence of which +is generally acknowledged; 1, the faculty of receiving the different impressions +caused by external objects, physical sensibility; and 2, the faculty +of preserving the impressions caused by these objects, called memory, or +weakened sensation. These faculties, the productive causes of thought, +we have in common with beasts.... Everything is reducible to +feeling.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Helvetius</hi>.</note> +who reduce all thought to feeling, and maintain that +we share the faculties which are the productive causes +of thought in common with beasts, are bound to confess +that <emph>as yet</emph> no race of animals has produced a language. +Lord Monboddo, for instance, admits that as yet no +<pb n='024'/><anchor id='Pg024'/> +animal has been discovered in the possession of language, +<q>not even the beaver, who of all the animals +we know, that are not, like the orang-outangs, of our +own species, comes nearest to us in sagacity.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Locke, who is generally classed together with these +materialistic philosophers, and who certainly vindicated +a large share of what had been claimed for the intellect +as the property of the senses, recognized most fully +the barrier which language, as such, placed between +man and brutes. <q>This I may be positive in,</q> he +writes, <q>that the power of abstracting is not at all +in brutes, and that the having of general ideas is +that which puts a perfect distinction between man +and brutes. For it is evident we observe no footsteps +in these of making use of general signs for universal +ideas; from which we have reason to imagine that +they have not the faculty of abstracting or making +general ideas, since they have no use of <emph>words</emph> or any +other general signs.</q> +</p> + +<p> +If, therefore, the science of language gives us an +insight into that which, by common consent, distinguishes +man from all other living beings; if it establishes +a frontier between man and the brute, which +can never be removed, it would seem to possess at +the present moment peculiar claims on the attention +of all who, while watching with sincere admiration +the progress of comparative physiology, yet consider +it their duty to enter their manly protest against a +revival of the shallow theories of Lord Monboddo. +</p> + +<p> +But to return to our survey of the history of the +physical sciences. We had examined the empirical +stage through which every science has to pass. We +saw that, for instance, in botany, a man who has +<pb n='025'/><anchor id='Pg025'/> +travelled through distant countries, who has collected +a vast number of plants, who knows their names, +their peculiarities, and their medicinal qualities, is +not yet a botanist, but only a herbalist, a lover of +plants, or what the Italians call a +<emph>dilettante</emph>, from +<emph>dilettare</emph>, +to delight. The real science of plants, like +every other science, begins with the work of classification. +An empirical acquaintance with facts rises +to a scientific knowledge of facts as soon as the mind +discovers beneath the multiplicity of single productions +the unity of an organic system. This discovery is +made by means of comparison and classification. We +cease to study each flower for its own sake; and by +continually enlarging the sphere of our observation, +we try to discover what is common to many and +offers those essential points on which groups or natural +classes may be established. These classes again, +in their more general features, are mutually compared; +new points of difference, or of similarity of a +more general and higher character, spring to view, and +enable us to discover classes of classes, or families. +And when the whole kingdom of plants has thus +been surveyed, and a simple tissue of names been +thrown over the garden of nature; when we can +lift it up, as it were, and view it in our mind as a +whole, as a system well defined and complete, we then +speak of the science of plants, or botany. We have +entered into altogether a new sphere of knowledge +where the individual is subject to the general, fact to +law; we discover thought, order, and purpose pervading +the whole realm of nature, and we perceive +the dark chaos of matter lighted up by the reflection +of a divine mind. Such views may be right or wrong. +<pb n='026'/><anchor id='Pg026'/> +Too hasty comparisons, or too narrow distinctions, may +have prevented the eye of the observer from discovering +the broad outlines of nature's plan. Yet every system, +however insufficient it may prove hereafter, is a step in +advance. If the mind of man is once impressed with +the conviction that there must be order and law everywhere, +it never rests again until all that seems irregular +has been eliminated, until the full beauty and harmony +of nature has been perceived, and the eye of man has +caught the eye of God beaming out from the midst of +all His works. The failures of the past prepare the +triumphs of the future. +</p> + +<p> +Thus, to recur to our former illustration, the systematic +arrangement of plants which bears the name +of Linnæus, and which is founded on the number +and character of the reproductive organs, failed to +bring out the natural order which pervades all that +grows and blossoms. Broad lines of demarcation +which unite or divide large tribes and families of +plants were invisible from his point of view. But in +spite of this, his work was not in vain. The fact that +plants in every part of the world belonged to one great +system was established once for all; and even in later +systems most of his classes and divisions have been preserved, +because the conformation of the reproductive +organs of plants happened to run parallel with other +more characteristic marks of true affinity.<note place='foot'><q>The +generative organs being those which are most remotely related +to the habits and food of an animal, I have always regarded as affording +very clear indications of its true affinities.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Owen, +as quoted by Darwin, +Origin of Species</hi>, p. 414.</note> It is the +same in the history of astronomy. Although the Ptolemæan +system was a wrong one, yet even from its eccentric +<pb n='027'/><anchor id='Pg027'/> +point of view, laws were discovered determining +the true movements of the heavenly bodies. The +conviction that there remains something unexplained is +sure to lead to the discovery of our error. There can +be no error in nature; the error must be with us. +This conviction lived in the heart of Aristotle when, +in spite of his imperfect knowledge of nature, he declared +<q>that there is in nature nothing interpolated or +without connection, as in a bad tragedy;</q> and from +his time forward every new fact and every new system +have confirmed his faith. +</p> + +<p> +The object of classification is clear. We understand +things if we can comprehend them; that is to say, if +we can grasp and hold together single facts, connect +isolated impressions, distinguish between what is essential +and what is merely accidental, and thus predicate +the general of the individual, and class the individual +under the general. This is the secret of all scientific +knowledge. Many sciences, while passing through this +second or classificatory stage, assume the title of comparative. +When the anatomist has finished the dissection +of numerous bodies, when he has given names to +each organ, and discovered the distinctive functions of +each, he is led to perceive similarity where at first he +saw dissimilarity only. He discovers in the lower animals +rudimentary indications of the more perfect organization +of the higher; and he becomes impressed with +the conviction that there is in the animal kingdom the +same order and purpose which pervades the endless +variety of plants or any other realm of nature. He +learns, if he did not know it before, that things were +not created at random or in a lump, but that there is +a scale which leads, by imperceptible degrees, from the +<pb n='028'/><anchor id='Pg028'/> +lowest infusoria to the crowning work of nature,—man; +that all is the manifestation of one and the same +unbroken chain of creative thought, the work of one +and the same all-wise Creator. +</p> + +<p> +In this way the second or classificatory leads us +naturally to the third or final stage—the theoretical, +or metaphysical. If the work of classification is properly +carried out, it teaches us that nothing exists in +nature by accident; that each individual belongs to +a species, each species to a genus; and that there are +laws which underlie the apparent freedom and variety +of all created things. These laws indicate to us the +presence of a purpose in the mind of the Creator; and +whereas the material world was looked upon by ancient +philosophers as a mere illusion, as an agglomerate of +atoms, or as the work of an evil principle, we now read +and interpret its pages as the revelation of a divine +power, and wisdom, and love. This has given to the +study of nature a new character. After the observer +has collected his facts, and after the classifier has placed +them in order, the student asks what is the origin and +what is the meaning of all this? and he tries to soar, +by means of induction, or sometimes even of divination, +into regions not accessible to the mere collector. +In this attempt the mind of man no doubt has frequently +met with the fate of Phaeton; but, undismayed +by failure, he asks again and again for his +father's steeds. It has been said that this so-called +philosophy of nature has never achieved anything; +that it has done nothing but prove that things must +be exactly as they had been found to be by the observer +and collector. Physical science, however, would +never have been what it is without the impulses which +<pb n='029'/><anchor id='Pg029'/> +it received from the philosopher, nay even from the +poet. <q>At the limits of exact knowledge</q> (I quote +the words of Humboldt), <q>as from a lofty island-shore, +the eye loves to glance towards distant regions. The +images which it sees may be illusive; but, like the +illusive images which people imagined they had seen +from the Canaries or the Azores, long before the time +of Columbus, they may lead to the discovery of a new +world.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Copernicus, in the dedication of his work to Pope +Paul III. (it was commenced in 1517, finished 1530, +published 1543), confesses that he was brought to the +discovery of the sun's central position, and of the diurnal +motion of the earth, not by observation or analysis, +but by what he calls the feeling of a want of symmetry +in the Ptolemaic system. But who had told him that +there <emph>must</emph> be symmetry in all the movements of the +celestial bodies, or that complication was not more +sublime than simplicity? Symmetry and simplicity, +before they were discovered by the observer, were +postulated by the philosopher. The first idea of revolutionizing +the heavens was suggested to Copernicus, +as he tells us himself, by an ancient Greek philosopher, +by Philolaus, the Pythagorean. No doubt with +Philolaus the motion of the earth was only a guess, or, +if you like, a happy intuition. Nevertheless, if we +may trust the words of Copernicus, it is quite possible +that without that guess we should never have heard of +the Copernican system. Truth is not found by addition +and multiplication only. When speaking of Kepler, +whose method of reasoning has been considered as +unsafe and fantastic by his contemporaries as well as by +later astronomers, Sir David Brewster remarks very +<pb n='030'/><anchor id='Pg030'/> +truly, <q>that, as an instrument of research, the influence +of imagination has been much overlooked by those +who have ventured to give laws to philosophy.</q> The +torch of imagination is as necessary to him who looks +for truth, as the lamp of study. Kepler held both, and +more than that, he had the star of faith to guide him +in all things from darkness to light. +</p> + +<p> +In the history of the physical sciences, the three +stages which we have just described as the empirical, +the classificatory, and the theoretical, appear +generally in chronological order. I say, generally, +for there have been instances, as in the case just +quoted of Philolaus, where the results properly belonging +to the third have been anticipated in the +first stage. To the quick eye of genius one case may +be like a thousand, and one experiment, well chosen, +may lead to the discovery of an absolute law. Besides, +there are great chasms in the history of science. +The tradition of generations is broken by political or +ethnic earthquakes, and the work that was nearly finished +has frequently had to be done again from the +beginning, when a new surface had been formed for +the growth of a new civilization. The succession, +however, of these three stages is no doubt the natural +one, and it is very properly observed in the study of +every science. The student of botany begins as a +collector of plants. Taking each plant by itself, he +observes its peculiar character, its habitat, its proper +season, its popular or unscientific name. He learns to +distinguish between the roots, the stem, the leaves, the +flower, the calyx, the stamina, and pistils. He learns, +so to say, the practical grammar of the plant before +he can begin to compare, to arrange, and classify. +</p> + +<pb n='031'/><anchor id='Pg031'/> + +<p> +Again, no one can enter with advantage on the +third stage of any physical science without having +passed through the second. No one can study <emph>the</emph> +plant, no one can understand the bearing of such a +work as, for instance, Professor Schleiden's <q>Life of +the Plant,</q><note place='foot'>Die Pflanze und ihr Leben, +von M. T. Schleiden. Leipzig, 1858.</note> who has not studied the life of plants in +the wonderful variety, and in the still more wonderful +order, of nature. These last and highest achievements +of inductive philosophy are possible only after the +way has been cleared by previous classification. The +philosopher must command his classes like regiments +which obey the order of their general. Thus alone +can the battle be fought and truth be conquered. +</p> + +<p> +After this rapid glance at the history of the other +physical sciences, we now return to our own, the science +of language, in order to see whether it really is +a science, and whether it can be brought back to the +standard of the inductive sciences. We want to know +whether it has passed, or is still passing, through the +three phases of physical research; whether its progress +has been systematic or desultory, whether its method +has been appropriate or not. But before we do this, we +shall, I think, have to do something else. You may +have observed that I always took it for granted that +the science of language, which is best known in this +country by the name of comparative philology, is one +of the physical sciences, and that therefore its method +ought to be the same as that which has been followed +with so much success in botany, geology, anatomy, +and other branches of the study of nature. In the +history of the physical sciences, however, we look in +vain for a place assigned to comparative philology, and +<pb n='032'/><anchor id='Pg032'/> +its very name would seem to show that it belongs to +quite a different sphere of human knowledge. There +are two great divisions of human knowledge, which, +according to their subject-matter, are called <emph>physical</emph> +and <emph>historical</emph>. Physical science deals with the works +of God, historical science with the works of man. +Now if we were to judge by its name, comparative +philology, like classical philology, would seem to take +rank, not as a physical, but as an historical science, +and the proper method to be applied to it would be +that which is followed in the history of art, of law, +of politics, and religion. However, the title of comparative +philology must not be allowed to mislead us. +It is difficult to say by whom that title was invented; +but all that can be said in defence of it is, that the +founders of the science of language were chiefly scholars +or philologists, and that they based their inquiries +into the nature and laws of language on a comparison +of as many facts as they could collect within their own +special spheres of study. Neither in Germany, which +may well be called the birthplace of this science, nor +in France, where it has been cultivated with brilliant +success, has that title been adopted. It will not be +difficult to show that, although the science of language +owes much to the classical scholar, and though in return +it has proved of great use to him, yet comparative +philology has really nothing whatever in common +with philology in the usual meaning of the word. +Philology, whether classical or oriental, whether treating +of ancient or modern, of cultivated or barbarous +languages, is an historical science. Language is here +treated simply as a means. The classical scholar uses +Greek or Latin, the oriental scholar Hebrew or Sanskrit, +<pb n='033'/><anchor id='Pg033'/> +or any other language, as a key to an understanding +of the literary monuments which by-gone ages have +bequeathed to us, as a spell to raise from the tomb of +time the thoughts of great men in different ages and +different countries, and as a means ultimately to trace +the social, moral, intellectual, and religious progress of +the human race. In the same manner, if we study +living languages, it is not for their own sake that we +acquire grammars and vocabularies. We do so on +account of their practical usefulness. We use them +as letters of introduction to the best society or to the +best literature of the leading nations of Europe. In +comparative philology the case is totally different. In +the science of language, languages are not treated as +a means; language itself becomes the sole object of +scientific inquiry. Dialects which have never produced +any literature at all, the jargons of savage tribes, +the clicks of the Hottentots, and the vocal modulations +of the Indo-Chinese are as important, nay, for the solution +of some of our problems, more important, than +the poetry of Homer, or the prose of Cicero. We do +not want to know languages, we want to know language; +what language is, how it can form a vehicle +or an organ of thought; we want to know its origin, +its nature, its laws; and it is only in order to arrive +at that knowledge that we collect, arrange, and classify +all the facts of language that are within our reach. +</p> + +<p> +And here I must protest, at the very outset of these +lectures, against the supposition that the student of +language must necessarily be a great linguist. I shall +have to speak to you in the course of these lectures of +hundreds of languages, some of which, perhaps, you +may never have heard mentioned even by name. Do +<pb n='034'/><anchor id='Pg034'/> +not suppose that I know these languages as you know +Greek or Latin, French or German. In that sense I +know indeed very few languages, and I never aspired +to the fame of a Mithridates or a Mezzofanti. It is +impossible for a student of language to acquire a practical +knowledge of all tongues with which he has to +deal. He does not wish to speak the Kachikal language, +of which a professorship was lately founded in +the University of Guatemala,<note place='foot'>Sir J. Stoddart, +Glossology, p. 22.</note> or to acquire the elegancies +of the idiom of the Tcheremissians; nor is it his +ambition to explore the literature of the Samoyedes, or +the New-Zealanders. It is the grammar and the dictionary +which form the subject of his inquiries. These +he consults and subjects to a careful analysis, but he +does not encumber his memory with paradigms of +nouns and verbs, or with long lists of words which +have never been used in any work of literature. It is +true, no doubt, that no language will unveil the whole +of its wonderful structure except to the scholar who +has studied it thoroughly and critically in a number +of literary works representing the various periods of +its growth. Nevertheless, short lists of vocables, and +imperfect sketches of a grammar, are in many instances +all that the student can expect to obtain, or +can hope to master and to use for the purposes he has +in view. He must learn to make the best of this fragmentary +information, like the comparative anatomist, +who frequently learns his lessons from the smallest +fragments of fossil bones, or the vague pictures of +animals brought home by unscientific travellers. If it +were necessary for the comparative philologist to acquire +a critical or practical acquaintance with all the +<pb n='035'/><anchor id='Pg035'/> +languages which form the subject of his inquiries, the +science of language would simply be an impossibility. +But we do not expect the botanist to be an experienced +gardener, or the geologist a miner, or the ichthyologist +a practical fisherman. Nor would it be reasonable to +object in the science of language to the same division +of labor which is necessary for the successful cultivation +of subjects much less comprehensive. Though +much of what we might call the realm of language is +lost to us forever, though whole periods in the history +of language are by necessity withdrawn from our +observation, yet the mass of human speech that lies +before us, whether in the petrified strata of ancient +literature or in the countless variety of living languages +and dialects, offers a field as large, if not larger, +than any other branch of physical research. It is +impossible to fix the exact number of known languages, +but their number can hardly be less than nine hundred. +That this vast field should never have excited +the curiosity of the natural philosopher before the +beginning of our century may seem surprising, more +surprising even than the indifference with which former +generations treated the lessons which even the +stones seemed to teach of the life still throbbing in the +veins and on the very surface of the earth. The saying +that "familiarity breeds contempt" would seem +applicable to the subjects of both these sciences. The +gravel of our walks hardly seemed to deserve a scientific +treatment, and the language which every plough-boy +can speak could not be raised without an effort to +the dignity of a scientific problem. Man had studied +every part of nature, the mineral treasures in the +bowels of the earth, the flowers of each season, the +<pb n='036'/><anchor id='Pg036'/> +animals of every continent, the laws of storms, and +the movements of the heavenly bodies; he had analyzed +every substance, dissected every organism, he +knew every bone and muscle, every nerve and fibre of +his own body to the ultimate elements which compose +his flesh and blood; he had meditated on the nature of +his soul, on the laws of his mind, and tried to penetrate +into the last causes of all being—and yet language, +without the aid of which not even the first step +in this glorious career could have been made, remained +unnoticed. Like a veil that hung too close over the +eye of the human mind, it was hardly perceived. In +an age when the study of antiquity attracted the most +energetic minds, when the ashes of Pompeii were +sifted for the playthings of Roman life; when parchments +were made to disclose, by chemical means, the +erased thoughts of Grecian thinkers; when the tombs +of Egypt were ransacked for their sacred contents, and +the palaces of Babylon and Nineveh forced to surrender +the clay diaries of Nebuchadnezzar; when everything, +in fact, that seemed to contain a vestige of the +early life of man was anxiously searched for and carefully +preserved in our libraries and museums,—language, +which in itself carries us back far beyond the +cuneiform literature of Assyria and Babylonia, and the +hieroglyphic documents of Egypt; which connects ourselves, +through an unbroken chain of speech, with the +very ancestors of our race, and still draws its life from +the first utterances of the human mind,—language, +the living and speaking witness of the whole history +of our race, was never cross-examined by the student +of history, was never made to disclose its secrets until +questioned and, so to say, brought back to itself within +<pb n='037'/><anchor id='Pg037'/> +the last fifty years, by the genius of a Humboldt, +Bopp, Grimm, Bunsen, and others. If you consider +that, whatever view we take of the origin and dispersion +of language, nothing new has ever been added to +the substance of language, that all its changes have +been changes of form, that no new root or radical has +ever been invented by later generations, as little as one +single element has ever been added to the material +world in which we live; if you bear in mind that in +one sense, and in a very just sense, we may be said to +handle the very words which issued from the mouth of +the son of God, when he gave names to <q>all cattle, +and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the +field,</q> you will see, I believe, that the science of language +has claims on your attention, such as few +sciences can rival or excel. +</p> + +<p> +Having thus explained the manner in which I intend +to treat the science of language, I hope in my +next lecture to examine the objections of those philosophers +who see in language nothing but a contrivance +devised by human skill for the more expeditious +communication of our thoughts, and who would wish +to see it treated, not as a production of nature, but +as a work of human art. +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='038'/><anchor id='Pg038'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Lecture II. The Growth Of Language In Contradistinction To +The History Of Language.</head> + +<p> +In claiming for the science of language a place +among the physical sciences, I was prepared to meet +with many objections. The circle of the physical +sciences seemed closed, and it was not likely that a +new claimant should at once be welcomed among the +established branches and scions of the ancient aristocracy +of learning.<note place='foot'>Dr. Whewell classes the science +of language as one of the palaitiological +sciences; but he makes a distinction between palaitiological sciences +treating of material things, for instance, geology, and others respecting +the products which result from man's imaginative and social endowments, +for instance, comparative philology. He excludes the latter from the circle +of the physical sciences, properly so called, but he adds: <q>We began +our inquiry with the trust that any sound views which we should be able +to obtain respecting the nature of truth in the physical sciences, and the +mode of discovering it, must also tend to throw light upon the nature and +prospects of knowledge of all other kinds;—must be useful to us in moral, +political, and philological researches. We stated this as a confident anticipation; +and the evidence of the justice of our belief already begins to appear. +We have seen that biology leads us to psychology, if we choose to +follow the path; and thus the passage from the material to the immaterial +has already unfolded itself at one point; and we now perceive that there +are several large provinces of speculation which concern subjects belonging +to man's immaterial nature, and which are governed by the same laws +as sciences altogether physical. It is not our business to dwell on the +prospects which our philosophy thus opens to our contemplation; but we +may allow ourselves, in this last stage of our pilgrimage among the +foundations of the physical sciences, to be cheered and animated by the +ray that thus beams upon us, however dimly, from a higher and brighter +region.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Indications of the Creator</hi>, p. 146.</note> +</p> + +<pb n='039'/><anchor id='Pg039'/> + +<p> +The first objection which was sure to be raised on +the part of such sciences as botany, geology, or physiology +is this:—Language is the work of man; it +was invented by man as a means of communicating +his thoughts, when mere looks and gestures proved +inefficient; and it was gradually, by the combined +efforts of succeeding generations, brought to that perfection +which we admire in the idiom of the Bible, the +Vedas, the Koran, and in the poetry of Homer, Virgil, +Dante, and Shakespeare. Now it is perfectly true that +if language be the work of man, in the same sense in +which a statue, or a temple, or a poem, or a law are +properly called the works of man, the science of language +would have to be classed as an historical science. +We should have a history of language as we have a +history of art, of poetry, and of jurisprudence, but we +could not claim for it a place side by side with the +various branches of Natural History. It is true, also, +that if you consult the works of the most distinguished +modern philosophers you will find that whenever they +speak of language, they take it for granted that language +is a human invention, that words are artificial +signs, and that the varieties of human speech arose +from different nations agreeing on different sounds as +the most appropriate signs of their different ideas. +This view of the origin of language was so powerfully +advocated by the leading philosophers of the last +century, that it has retained an undisputed currency +even among those who, on almost every other point, +are strongly opposed to the teaching of that school. +A few voices, indeed, have been raised to protest +against the theory of language being originally invented +by man. But they, in their zeal to vindicate +<pb n='040'/><anchor id='Pg040'/> +the divine origin of language, seem to have been carried +away so far as to run counter to the express +statements of the Bible. For in the Bible it is not +the Creator who gives names to all things, but +Adam. <q>Out of the ground,</q> we read, <q>the Lord +God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl +of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see +what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam +called every living creature, that was the name +thereof.</q><note place='foot'>Gen. ii. 19.</note> +But with the exception of this small class of +philosophers, more orthodox even than the Bible,<note place='foot'>St. +Basil was accused by Eunomius of denying Divine Providence, because +he would not admit that God had created the names of all things, +but ascribed the invention of language to the faculties which God had implanted +in man. St. Gregory, bishop of Nyssa in Cappadocia (331-396), +defended St. Basil. <q>Though God has given to human nature its faculties,</q> +he writes, <q>it does not follow that therefore He produces all the actions +which we perform. He has given us the faculty of building a house +and doing any other work; but we surely are the builders, and not He. In +the same manner our faculty of speaking is the work of Him who has so +framed our nature; but the invention of words for naming each object is +the work of our mind.</q> See Ladevi-Roche, De l'Origine du Langage: +Bordeaux, 1860, p. 14. Also, Horne Tooke, Diversions of Purley, p. 19.</note> +the generally received opinion on the origin of language +is that which was held by <hi rend='italic'>Locke</hi>, which was +powerfully advocated by <hi rend='italic'>Adam Smith</hi> in his Essay on +the Origin of Language, appended to his Treatise on +Moral Sentiments, and which was adopted with slight +modifications by <hi rend='italic'>Dugald Stewart</hi>. According to them, +man must have lived for a time in a state of mutism, +his only means of communication consisting in gestures +of the body, and in the changes of countenance, +till at last, when ideas multiplied that could no longer +be pointed at with the fingers, <q>they found it necessary +to invent artificial signs of which the meaning was +<pb n='041'/><anchor id='Pg041'/> +fixed by mutual agreement.</q> We need not dwell on +minor differences of opinion as to the exact process +by which this artificial language is supposed to have +been formed. Adam Smith would wish us to believe +that the first artificial words were <emph>verbs</emph>. Nouns, he +thinks, were of less urgent necessity because things +could be pointed at or imitated, whereas mere actions, +such as are expressed by verbs, could not. He therefore +supposes that when people saw a wolf coming, +they pointed at him, and simply cried out, <q>He +comes.</q> Dugald Stewart, on the contrary, thinks +that the first artificial words were nouns, and that +the verbs were supplied by gesture; that, therefore, +when people saw a wolf coming, they did not cry +<q>He comes,</q> but <q>Wolf, Wolf,</q> leaving the rest to +be imagined.<note place='foot'>D. Stewart, Works, vol. iii. p. 27.</note> +</p> + +<p> +But whether the verb or the noun was the first to +be invented is of little importance; nor is it possible +for us, at the very beginning of our inquiry into the +nature of language, to enter upon a minute examination +of a theory which represents language as a work +of human art, and as established by mutual agreement +as a medium of communication. While fully +admitting that if this theory were true, the science +of language would not come within the pale of the +physical sciences, I must content myself for the present +with pointing out that no one has yet explained +how, without language, a discussion on the merits of +each word, such as must necessarily have preceded a +mutual agreement, could have been carried on. But +as it is the object of these lectures to prove that language +is not a work of human art, in the same sense +<pb n='042'/><anchor id='Pg042'/> +as painting, or building, or writing, or printing, I must +ask to be allowed, in this preliminary stage, simply to +enter my protest against a theory, which, though still +taught in the schools, is, nevertheless, I believe, without +a single fact to support its truth. +</p> + +<p> +But there are other objections besides this which +would seem to bar the admission of the science of +language to the circle of the physical sciences. Whatever +the origin of language may have been, it has +been remarked with a strong appearance of truth, +that language has a history of its own, like art, like +law, like religion; and that, therefore, the science of +language belongs to the circle of the <emph>historical</emph>, or, as +they used to be called, the <emph>moral</emph>, in contradistinction +to the <emph>physical</emph> sciences. It is a well-known fact, +which recent researches have not shaken, that nature +is incapable of progress or improvement. The flower +which the botanist observes to-day was as perfect +from the beginning. Animals, which are endowed +with what is called an artistic instinct, have never +brought that instinct to a higher degree of perfection. +The hexagonal cells of the bee are not more regular +in the nineteenth century than at any earlier period, +and the gift of song has never, as far as we know, +been brought to a higher perfection by our nightingale +than by the Philomelo of the Greeks. <q>Natural +History,</q> to quote Dr. Whewell's words,<note place='foot'>History of +Inductive Sciences, vol. iii. p. 531.</note> <q>when systematically +treated, excludes all that is historical, for it +classes objects by their permanent and universal properties, +and has nothing to do with the narration of +particular or casual facts.</q> Now, if we consider the +large number of tongues spoken in different parts of +<pb n='043'/><anchor id='Pg043'/> +the world with all their dialectic and provincial varieties, +if we observe the great changes which each +of these tongues has undergone in the course of centuries, +how Latin was changed into Italian, Spanish, +Portuguese, Provençal, French, Wallachian, and Roumansch; +how Latin again, together with Greek, and +the Celtic, the Teutonic, and Slavonic languages, together +likewise with the ancient dialects of India and +Persia, must have sprung from an earlier language, the +mother of the whole Indo-European or Aryan family +of speech; if we see how Hebrew, Arabic, and Syriac, +with several minor dialects, are but different impressions +of one and the same common type, and must all +have flowed from the same source, the original language +of the Semitic race; and if we add to these two, +the Aryan and Semitic, at least one more well-established +class of languages, the Turanian, comprising the +dialects of the nomad races scattered over Central and +Northern Asia, the Tungusic, Mongolic, Turkic,<note place='foot'>Names ending +in <hi rend='italic'>ic</hi>, are names of classes as distinct from the names of single +languages.</note> Samoyedic, +and Finnic, all radii from one common centre +of speech:—if we watch this stream of language rolling +on through centuries in these three mighty arms, +which, before they disappear from our sight in the far +distance, clearly show a convergence towards one common +source: it would seem, indeed, as if there were an +historical life inherent in language, and as if both the +will of man and the power of time could tell, if not on +its substance, at least on its form. And even if the +mere local varieties of speech were not considered sufficient +ground for excluding language from the domain +of natural science, there would still remain the greater +<pb n='044'/><anchor id='Pg044'/> +difficulty of reconciling with the recognized principles +of physical science the historical changes affecting +every one of these varieties. Every part of nature, +whether mineral, plant, or animal, is the same in kind +from the beginning to the end of its existence, whereas +few languages could be recognized as the same after +the lapse of but a thousand years. The language of +Alfred is so different from the English of the present +day that we have to study it in the same manner as +we study Greek and Latin. We can read Milton and +Bacon, Shakespeare and Hooker; we can make out +Wycliffe and Chaucer; but, when we come to the +English of the thirteenth century, we can but guess +its meaning, and we fail even in this with works previous +to the Ormulum and Layamon. The historical +changes of language may be more or less rapid, but +they take place at all times and in all countries. They +have reduced the rich and powerful idiom of the poets +of the Veda to the meagre and impure jargon of the +modern Sepoy. They have transformed the language +of the Zend-Avesta and of the mountain records of +Behistún into that of Firdusi and the modern Persians; +the language of Virgil into that of Dante, the language +of Ulfilas into that of Charlemagne, the language of +Charlemagne into that of Goethe. We have reason +to believe that the same changes take place with even +greater violence and rapidity in the dialects of savage +tribes, although, in the absence of a written literature, it +is extremely difficult to obtain trustworthy information. +But in the few instances where careful observations +have been made on this interesting subject, it has been +found that among the wild and illiterate tribes of Siberia, +Africa, and Siam, two or three generations are +<pb n='045'/><anchor id='Pg045'/> +sufficient to change the whole aspect of their dialects. +The languages of highly civilized nations, on the +contrary, become more and more stationary, and seem +sometimes almost to lose their power of change. Where +there is a classical literature, and where its language is +spread to every town and village, it seems almost impossible +that any further changes should take place. +Nevertheless, the language of Rome, for so many centuries +the queen of the whole civilized world, was deposed +by the modern Romance dialects, and the ancient +Greek was supplanted in the end by the modern Romaic. +And though the art of printing and the wide +diffusion of Bibles, and Prayer-books, and newspapers +have acted as still more powerful barriers to arrest the +constant flow of human speech, we may see that the +language of the authorized version of the Bible, though +perfectly intelligible, is no longer the spoken language +of England. In Booker's Scripture and Prayer-book +Glossary<note place='foot'>Lectures on the English Language, by G. P. Marsh: New York, +1860, p. 263 and 630. These lectures embody the result of much careful research, +and are full of valuable observations.</note> the number of words or senses of words +which have become obsolete since 1611, amount to 388, +or nearly one fifteenth part of the whole number of +words used in the Bible. Smaller changes, changes +of accent and meaning, the reception of new, and the +dropping of old words, we may watch as taking place +under our own eyes. Rogers<note place='foot'>Marsh, p. 532, +<hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</note> said that <q><emph>cóntemplate</emph> +is bad enough, but <emph>bálcony</emph> makes me sick,</q> whereas at present +no one is startled by <emph>cóntemplate</emph> instead of <emph>contémplate</emph>, +and <emph>bálcony</emph> has become more usual than <emph>balcóny</emph>. +Thus <emph>Roome</emph> and <emph>chaney</emph>, <emph>layloc</emph> and +<emph>goold</emph>, have but lately been driven from the stage by +<emph>Rome</emph>, <emph>china</emph>, +<pb n='046'/><anchor id='Pg046'/> +<emph>lilac</emph>, and <emph>gold</emph>, and some courteous gentlemen of the +old school still continue to be <emph>obleeged</emph> instead of being +<emph>obliged</emph>. <emph>Force</emph>,<note place='foot'>Marsh, +p. 589.</note> in the sense of a waterfall, and <emph>gill</emph>, in +the sense of a rocky ravine, were not used in classical +English before Wordsworth. <emph>Handbook</emph>,<note place='foot'>Sir +J. Stoddart, Glossology, p. 60.</note> though an old +Anglo-Saxon word, has but lately taken the place of +<emph>manual</emph>, and a number of words such as <emph>cab</emph> for cabriolet, +<emph>buss</emph> for omnibus, and even a verb such as <emph>to shunt</emph> +tremble still on the boundary line between the vulgar +and the literary idioms. Though the grammatical +changes that have taken place since the publication +of the authorized version are yet fewer in number, +still we may point out some. The termination of the +third person singular in <emph>th</emph> is now entirely replaced by +<emph>s</emph>. No one now says <emph>he liveth</emph>, but only <emph>he lives</emph>. +Several of the irregular imperfects and participles have assumed +a new form. No one now uses <emph>he spake</emph>, and <emph>he +drave</emph>, instead of <emph>he spoke</emph>, and <emph>he drove</emph>; +<emph>holpen</emph> is replaced +by <emph>helped</emph>; <emph>holden</emph> by <emph>held</emph>; <emph>shapen</emph> +by <emph>shaped</emph>. +The distinction between <emph>ye</emph> and <emph>you</emph>, the former being +reserved for the nominative, the latter for all the other +cases, is given up in modern English; and what is apparently +a new grammatical form, the possessive pronoun +<emph>its</emph>, has sprung into life since the beginning of the +seventeenth century. It never occurs in the Bible; +and though it is used three or four times by Shakespeare, +Ben Jonson does not recognize it as yet in his +English Grammar.<note place='foot'>Trench, English Past +and Present, p. 114; Marsh, p. 397.</note> +</p> + +<p> +It is argued, therefore, that as language, differing +thereby from all other productions of nature, is liable +to historical alterations, it is not fit to be treated in the +<pb n='047'/><anchor id='Pg047'/> +same manner as the subject-matter of all the other +physical sciences. +</p> + +<p> +There is something very plausible in this objection, +but if we examine it more carefully, we shall find +that it rests entirely on a confusion of terms. We +must distinguish between historical change and natural +growth. Art, science, philosophy, and religion all have +a history; language, or any other production of nature, +admits only of growth. +</p> + +<p> +Let us consider, first, that although there is a continuous +change in language, it is not in the power of +man either to produce or to prevent it. We might +think as well of changing the laws which control the +circulation of our blood, or of adding an inch to our +height, as of altering the laws of speech, or inventing +new words according to our own pleasure. As man is +the lord of nature only if he knows her laws and submits +to them, the poet and the philosopher become the lords +of language only if they know its laws and obey them. +</p> + +<p> +When the Emperor Tiberius had made a mistake, +and was reproved for it by Marcellus, another grammarian +of the name of Capito, who happened to be present, +remarked that what the emperor said was good +Latin, or, if it were not, it would soon be so. Marcellus, +more of a grammarian than a courtier, replied, +<q>Capito is a liar; for, Cæsar, thou canst give the +Roman citizenship to men, but not to words.</q> A similar +anecdote is told of the German Emperor Sigismund. +When presiding at the Council of Costnitz, +he addressed the assembly in a Latin speech, exhorting +them to eradicate the schism of the Hussites. +<q>Videte Patres,</q> he said, <q>ut eradicetis schismam +Hussitarum.</q> He was very unceremoniously called +<pb n='048'/><anchor id='Pg048'/> +to order by a monk, who called out, <q>Serenissime Rex, +schisma est generis neutri.</q><note place='foot'>As several +of my reviewers have found fault with the monk for using +the genitive <emph>neutri</emph>, instead of +<emph>neutrius</emph>, I beg to refer to Priscianus, 1. vi. +c. i. and c. vii. The expression +<emph>generis neutrius</emph>, though frequently used by +modern editors, has no authority, I believe, in ancient +Latin.</note> The emperor, however, +without losing his presence of mind, asked the impertinent +monk, <q>How do you know it?</q> The old +Bohemian school-master replied, <q>Alexander Gallus +says so.</q> <q>And who is Alexander Gallus?</q> the emperor +rejoined. The monk replied, <q>He was a monk.</q> +<q>Well,</q> said the emperor, <q>and I am Emperor of +Rome; and my word, I trust, will be as good as the +word of any monk.</q> No doubt the laughers were +with the emperor; but for all that, +<emph>schisma</emph> remained +a neuter, and not even an emperor could change its +gender or termination. +</p> + +<p> +The idea that language can be changed and improved +by man is by no means a new one. We know +that Protagoras, an ancient Greek philosopher, after +laying down some laws on gender, actually began to find +fault with the text of Homer, because it did not agree +with his rules. But here, as in every other instance, +the attempt proved unavailing. Try to alter the smallest +rule of English, and you will find that it is physically +impossible. There is apparently a very small +difference between <emph>much</emph> and <emph>very</emph>, but you can hardly +ever put one in the place of the other. You can say, +<q>I am very happy,</q> but not <q>I am much happy,</q> +though you may say <q>I am most happy.</q> On the +contrary, you can say <q>I am much misunderstood,</q> +but not <q>I am very misunderstood.</q> Thus the western +Romance dialects, Spanish and Portuguese, together +<pb n='049'/><anchor id='Pg049'/> +with Wallachian, can only employ the Latin +word <emph>magis</emph> for forming +comparatives:—Sp. <emph>mas +dulce</emph>; Port. <emph>mais doce</emph>; +Wall, <emph>mai dulce</emph>; while +French, Provençal, and Italian only allow <emph>of plus</emph> for +the same purpose: Ital. <emph>più dolce</emph>; +Prov. <emph>plus dous</emph>; +Fr. <emph>plus doux</emph>. +It is by no means impossible, however, +that this distinction between <emph>very</emph>, which is now used +with adjectives only, and <emph>much</emph>, which precedes participles, +should disappear in time. In fact, <q>very pleased</q> +and <q>very delighted</q> are Americanisms which may +be heard even in this country. But if that change +take place, it will not be by the will of any individual, +nor by the mutual agreement of any large number of +men, but rather in spite of the exertions of grammarians +and academies. And here you perceive the first +difference between history and growth. An emperor +may change the laws of society, the forms of religion, +the rules of art: it is in the power of one generation, +or even of one individual, to raise an art to the highest +pitch of perfection, while the next may allow it to +lapse, till a new genius takes it up again with renewed +ardor. In all this we have to deal with the conscious +acts of individuals, and we therefore move on historical +ground. If we compare the creations of Michael Angelo +or Raphael with the statues and frescoes of ancient +Rome, we can speak of a history of art. We can +connect two periods separated by thousands of years +through the works of those who handed on the traditions +of art from century to century; but we shall +never meet with that continuous and unconscious +growth which connects the language of Plautus with +that of Dante. The process through which language +is settled and unsettled combines in one the two opposite +<pb n='050'/><anchor id='Pg050'/> +elements of necessity and free will. Though the +individual seems to be the prime agent in producing +new words and new grammatical forms, he is so only +after his individuality has been merged in the common +action of the family, tribe, or nation to which he belongs. +He can do nothing by himself, and the first +impulse to a new formation in language, though given +by an individual, is mostly, if not always, given without +premeditation, nay, unconsciously. The individual, +as such, is powerless, and the results apparently +produced by him depend on laws beyond his control, +and on the co-operation of all those who form together +with him one class, one body, or one organic whole. +</p> + +<p> +But, though it is easy to show, as we have just done, +that language cannot be changed or moulded by the +taste, the fancy, or genius of man, it is very difficult to +explain what causes the growth of language. Ever +since Horace it has been usual to compare the growth of +languages with the growth of trees. But comparisons +are treacherous things. What do we know of the real +causes of the growth of a tree, and what can we gain +by comparing things which we do not quite understand +with things which we understand even less? Many +people speak, for instance, of the terminations of the +verb, as if they sprouted out from the root as from +their parent stock.<note place='foot'>Castelvetro, in +Horne Tooke, p. 629, <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</note> But what ideas can they connect +with such expressions? If we must compare language +with a tree, there is one point which may be illustrated +by this comparison, and this is that neither language +nor the tree can exist or grow by itself. Without the +soil, without air and light, the tree could not live; it +could not even be conceived to live. It is the same +<pb n='051'/><anchor id='Pg051'/> +with language. Language cannot exist by itself; it +requires a soil on which to grow, and that soil is the +human soul. To speak of language as a thing by itself, +as living a life of its own, as growing to maturity, +producing offspring, and dying away, is sheer mythology; +and though we cannot help using metaphorical +expressions, we should always be on our guard, when +engaged in inquiries like the present, against being +carried away by the very words which we are using. +</p> + +<p> +Now, what we call the growth of language comprises +two processes which should be carefully distinguished, +though they may be at work simultaneously. These +two processes I call, +</p> + +<p> +1. <hi rend='italic'>Dialectical Regeneration.</hi> +</p> + +<p> +2. <hi rend='italic'>Phonetic Decay.</hi> +</p> + +<p> +I begin with the second, as the more obvious, though +in reality its operations are mostly subsequent to the +operations of dialectical regeneration. I must ask you +at present to take it for granted that everything in +language had originally a meaning. As language can +have no other object but to express our meaning, it +might seem to follow almost by necessity that language +should contain neither more nor less than what is required +for that purpose. It would also seem to follow +that if language contains no more than what is necessary +for conveying a certain meaning, it would be +impossible to modify any part of it without defeating +its very purpose. This is really the case in some languages. +In Chinese, for instance, <emph>ten</emph> is expressed by +<emph>shĭ</emph>. It would be impossible to change +<emph>shĭ</emph> in the slightest +way without making it unfit to express <emph>ten</emph>. If +instead of <emph>shĭ</emph> +we pronounced <emph>t'sĭ</emph>, this would mean +<emph>seven</emph>, but not <emph>ten</emph>. But now, suppose we wished to +<pb n='052'/><anchor id='Pg052'/> +express double the quantity of ten, twice ten, or twenty. +We should in Chinese take <emph>eúl</emph>, which is two, +put it before <emph>shĭ</emph>, and say +<emph>eúl-shĭ</emph>, twenty. The same caution +which applied to <emph>shĭ</emph>, applies again to +<emph>eúl-shĭ</emph>. As soon +as you change it, by adding or dropping a single letter, +it is no longer twenty, but either something else or +nothing. We find exactly the same in other languages +which, like Chinese, are called monosyllabic. In +Tibetan, <emph>chu</emph> is ten, +<emph>nyi</emph> two; +<emph>nyi-chu</emph>, twenty. In +Burmese <emph>she</emph> is ten, +<emph>nhit</emph> two; +<emph>nhit-she</emph>, twenty. +</p> + +<p> +But how is it in English, or in Gothic, or in Greek +and Latin, or in Sanskrit? We do not say <emph>two-ten</emph> in +English, nor <emph>duo-decem</emph> +in Latin, nor <emph>dvi-da'sa</emph> in Sanskrit. +</p> + +<lg> +<l>We find<note place='foot'>Bopp, Comparative Grammar, § 320. +Schleicher, Deutsche Sprache, s. +233.</note> in Sanskrit <emph>vin'sati</emph>.</l> +<l>in Greek <emph>eikati</emph>.</l> +<l>in Latin <emph>viginti</emph>.</l> +<l>in English <emph>twenty</emph>.</l> +</lg> + +<p> +Now here we see, first, that the Sanskrit, Greek, and +Latin, are only local modifications of one and the same +original word; whereas the English <emph>twenty</emph> is a new +compound, the Gothic <emph>tvai tigjus</emph> (two decads), the +Anglo-Saxon <emph>tuêntig</emph>, framed from Teutonic materials; +a product, as we shall see, of Dialectical Regeneration. +</p> + +<p> +We next observe that the first part of the Latin +<emph>viginti</emph> and of the Sanskrit +<emph>vin'sati</emph> contains the same +number, which from <emph>dvi</emph> has been +reduced to <emph>vi</emph>. This +is not very extraordinary; for the Latin +<emph>bis</emph>, twice, +which you still hear at our concerts, likewise stands +for an original <emph>dvis</emph>, the English +<emph>twice</emph>, the Greek <emph>dis</emph>. +This <emph>dis</emph> +appears again as a Latin preposition, meaning +<emph>a-two</emph>; so that, for instance, <emph>discussion</emph> means, originally, +<pb n='053'/><anchor id='Pg053'/> +striking a-two, different from <emph>percussion</emph>, which +means striking through and through. <emph>Discussion</emph> is, +in fact, the cracking of a nut in order to get at its +kernel. Well, the same word, <emph>dvi</emph> or +<emph>vi</emph>, we have in +the Latin word for twenty, which is <emph>vi-ginti</emph>, +the Sanskrit +<emph>vin-'sati</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +It can likewise be proved that the second part of +<emph>viginti</emph> +is a corruption of the old word for ten. Ten, +in Sanskrit, is <emph>da'san</emph>; +from it is derived <emph>da'sati</emph>, a decad; +and this <emph>da'sati</emph> was again reduced +to <emph>'sati</emph>; thus +giving us with <emph>vi</emph> for +<emph>dvi</emph>, two, the Sanskrit +<emph>vi'sati</emph> or +<emph>vin'sati</emph>, twenty. +The Latin <emph>viginti</emph>, the +Greek <emph>eikati</emph>, +owe their origin to the same process. +</p> + +<p> +Now consider the immense difference—I do not +mean in sound, but in character—between two such +words as the Chinese <emph>eúl-shĭ</emph>, +two-ten, or twenty, and +those mere cripples of words which we meet with +in Sanskrit, Greek, and Latin. In Chinese there is +neither too much, nor too little. The word speaks +for itself, and requires no commentary. In Sanskrit, +on the contrary, the most essential parts of the two +component elements are gone, and what remains is a +kind of metamorphic agglomerate which cannot be +understood without a most minute microscopic analysis. +Here, then, you have an instance of what is +meant by <emph>phonetic corruption</emph>; and you will perceive +how, not only the form, but the whole nature of language +is destroyed by it. As soon as phonetic corruption +shows itself in a language, that language has lost +what we considered to be the most essential character +of all human speech, namely, that every part of it +should have a meaning. The people who spoke Sanskrit +were as little aware that +<emph>vin'sati</emph> meant <emph>twice ten</emph> +<pb n='054'/><anchor id='Pg054'/> +as a Frenchman is that <emph>vingt</emph> +contains the remains of +<emph>deux</emph> and <emph>dix</emph>. +Language, therefore, has entered into a +new stage as soon as it submits to the attacks of phonetic +change. The life of language has become benumbed +and extinct in those words or portions of +words which show the first traces of this phonetic +mould. Henceforth those words or portions of words +can be kept up only artificially or by tradition; and, +what is important, a distinction is henceforth established +between what is substantial or radical, and +what is merely formal or grammatical in words. +</p> + +<p> +For let us now take another instance, which will +make it clearer, how phonetic corruption leads to the +first appearance of so-called grammatical forms. We +are not in the habit of looking on <emph>twenty</emph> as the plural +or dual of <emph>ten</emph>. But how was a plural originally +formed? In Chinese, which from the first has guarded +most carefully against the taint of phonetic corruption, +the plural is formed in the most sensible manner. Thus, +man in Chinese is <emph>ģin</emph>; +<emph>kiai</emph> means the whole or totality. +This added to <emph>ģin</emph> gives +<emph>ģin-kiai</emph>, which is the +plural of man. There are other words which are +used for the same purpose in Chinese; for instance, +<emph>péi</emph>, which means a class. Hence, +<emph>ĭ</emph>, a stranger, followed +by <emph>péi</emph>, class, gives +<emph>ĭ-péi</emph>, strangers. We have +similar plurals in English, but we do not reckon them +as grammatical forms. Thus, <emph>man-kind</emph> is formed exactly +like <emph>ĭ-péi</emph>, stranger-kind; +<emph>Christendom</emph> is the same +as all Christians, and <emph>clergy</emph> is synonymous +with <emph>clerici</emph>. +The same process is followed in other cognate languages. +In Tibetan the plural is formed by the addition +of such words as <emph>kun</emph>, all, and +<emph>t'sogs</emph>, +multitude.<note place='foot'>Foucaux, Grammaire Tibetaine, p. +27, and Preface, p. x.</note> +<pb n='055'/><anchor id='Pg055'/> +Even the numerals, <emph>nine</emph> and <emph>hundred</emph>, are used for the +same purpose. And here again, as long as these words +are fully understood and kept alive, they resist phonetic +corruption; but the moment they lose, so to say, their +presence of mind, phonetic corruption sets in, and as +soon as phonetic corruption has commenced its ravages, +those portions of a word which it affects retain +a merely artificial or conventional existence, and dwindle +down to grammatical terminations. +</p> + +<p> +I am afraid I should tax your patience too much +were I to enter here on an analysis of the grammatical +terminations in Sanskrit, Greek, or Latin, in order to +show how these terminations arose out of independent +words, which were slowly reduced to mere dust by the +constant wear and tear of speech. But in order to +explain how the principle of phonetic decay leads to +the formation of grammatical terminations, let us look +to languages with which we are more familiar. Let us +take the French adverb. We are told by French grammarians<note place='foot'>Fuchs, +Romanische Sprachen, s. 355.</note> +that in order to form adverbs we have to add +the termination <emph>ment</emph>. Thus +from <emph>bon</emph>, good, we form +<emph>bonnement</emph>, from +<emph>vrai</emph>, true, +<emph>vraiment</emph>. This termination +does not exist in Latin. But we meet in Latin<note place='foot'>Quint., +v. 10, 52. Bonâ mente factum, ideo palam; malâ, ideo ex insidiis.</note> with +expressions such as <emph>bonâ mente</emph>, in good faith. +We read in Ovid, <q>Insistam forti mente,</q> I shall insist +with a strong mind or will, I shall insist strongly; in +French, <q>J'insisterai fortement.</q> Therefore, what +has happened in the growth of Latin, or in the change +of Latin into French, is simply this: in phrases such +as <emph>forti mente</emph>, +the last word was no longer felt as a distinct +<pb n='056'/><anchor id='Pg056'/> +word, and it lost at the same time its distinct pronunciation. +<emph>Mente</emph>, the ablative of +<emph>mens</emph>, was changed +into <emph>ment</emph>, +and was preserved as a merely formal element, +as the termination of adverbs, even in cases +where a recollection of the original meaning of +<emph>mente</emph> +(with a mind), would have rendered its employment +perfectly impossible. If we say in French that a hammer +falls <emph>lourdement</emph>, we little suspect that we +ascribe to a piece of iron a heavy mind. In Italian, though +the adverbial termination <emph>mente</emph> in +<emph>claramente</emph> is no +longer felt as a distinct word, it has not as yet been +affected by phonetic corruption; and in Spanish it is +sometimes used as a distinct word, though even then it +cannot be said to have retained its distinct meaning. +Thus, instead of saying, <q>claramente, concisamente y +elegantemente,</q> it is more elegant to say in Spanish, +<q>clara, concisa y elegante mente.</q> +</p> + +<p> +It is difficult to form any conception of the extent +to which the whole surface of a language may be altered +by what we have just described as phonetic +change. Think that in the French <emph>vingt</emph> you have +the same elements as in <emph>deux</emph> and <emph>dix</emph>; that the second +part of the French <emph>douze</emph>, twelve, represents the +Latin <emph>decim</emph> in <emph>duodecim</emph>; +that the final <emph>te</emph> of <emph>trente</emph> +was originally the Latin <emph>ginta</emph> in +<emph>triginta</emph>, which <emph>ginta</emph> +was again a derivation and abbreviation of the Sanskrit +<emph>da'sa</emph> or <emph>da'sati</emph>, ten. Then consider how early this +phonetic disease must have broken out. For in the +same manner as <emph>vingt</emph> in French, <emph>veinte</emph> in Spanish, and +<emph>venti</emph> in Italian presuppose the more primitive <emph>viginti</emph> +which we find in Latin, so this Latin <emph>viginti</emph>, together +with the Greek <emph>eikati</emph>, and the Sanskrit <emph>vin'sati</emph> presuppose +an earlier language from which they are in turn +<pb n='057'/><anchor id='Pg057'/> +derived, and in which, previous to <emph>viginti</emph>, there must +have been a more primitive form <emph>dvi-ginti</emph>, and previous +to this again, another compound as clear and intelligible +as the Chinese <emph>eúl-shĭ</emph>, consisting of the ancient +Aryan names for two, <emph>dvi</emph>, and ten, <emph>da'sati</emph>. Such is +the virulence of this phonetic change, that it will sometimes +eat away the whole body of a word, and leave +nothing behind but decayed fragments. Thus, <emph>sister</emph>, +which in Sanskrit is <emph>svasar</emph>,<note place='foot'>Sanskrit +<emph>s</emph> = Persian <emph>h</emph>; therefore <emph>svasar</emph> = +<emph>hvahar</emph>. This becomes <emph>chohar</emph>, +<emph>chor</emph>, and <emph>cho</emph>. Zend, <emph>qaņha</emph>, acc. +<emph>qaņharem</emph>, Persian, <emph>kháher</emph>. Bopp, +Comp. Gram. § 35.</note> appears in Pehlvi and in +Ossetian as <emph>cho</emph>. <emph>Daughter</emph>, +which in Sanskrit is <emph>duhitar</emph>, +has dwindled down in Bohemian to <emph>dci</emph> (pronounced +<emph>tsi</emph>).<note place='foot'>Schleicher, +Beiträge, b. ii. s. 392: <emph>dci</emph> = +<emph>dŭgti</emph>; gen. <emph>dcere</emph> = <emph>dŭgtere</emph>.</note> +Who would believe that <emph>tear</emph> and <emph>larme</emph> are derived +from the same source; that the French <emph>même</emph> +contains the Latin <emph>semetipsissimus</emph>; that in <emph>aujourd'hui</emph> +we have the Latin word <emph>dies</emph> twice!<note place='foot'><emph>Hui</emph> = +<emph>hodie</emph>, Ital. <emph>oggi</emph> and <emph>oggidi</emph>; +<emph>jour</emph> = <emph>diurnum</emph>, from <emph>dies</emph>.</note> Who would +recognize the Latin <emph>pater</emph> in the Armenian <emph>hayr</emph>? Yet +we make no difficulty about identifying <emph>père</emph> and <emph>pater</emph>; +and as several initial h's in Armenian correspond to an +original <emph>p</emph> (<emph>het</emph> = <emph>pes</emph>, +<emph>pedis</emph>; <emph>hing</emph> = πέντε; <emph>hour</emph> = πῦρ), +it follows that <emph>hayr</emph> is <emph>pater</emph>.<note place='foot'>See +M. M.'s Letter to Chevalier Bunsen, On the Turanian Languages, +p. 67.</note> +</p> + +<p> +We are accustomed to call these changes the growth +of language, but it would be more appropriate to call +this process of phonetic change decay, and thus to distinguish +it from the second or dialectical process which +we must now examine, and which involves, as you will +see, a more real principle of growth. +</p> + +<p> +In order to understand the meaning of <emph>dialectical +<pb n='058'/><anchor id='Pg058'/> +regeneration</emph> we must first see clearly what we mean by +dialect. We saw before that language has no independent +substantial existence. Language exists in +man, it lives in being spoken, it dies with each word +that is pronounced, and is no longer heard. It is a +mere accident that language should ever have been +reduced to writing, and have been made the vehicle +of a written literature. Even now the largest number +of languages have produced no literature. Among +the numerous tribes of Central Asia, Africa, America, +and Polynesia, language still lives in its natural state, +in a state of continual combustion; and it is there that +we must go if we wish to gain an insight into the +growth of human speech previous to its being arrested +by any literary interference. What we are accustomed +to call languages, the literary idioms of Greece, and +Rome, and India, of Italy, France, and Spain, must +be considered as artificial, rather than as natural forms +of speech. The real and natural life of language is in +its dialects, and in spite of the tyranny exercised by +the classical or literary idioms, the day is still very far +off which is to see the dialects, even of such classical +languages as Italian and French, entirely eradicated. +About twenty of the Italian dialects have been reduced +to writing, and made known by the press.<note place='foot'>See +Marsh, p. 678; Sir John Stoddart's Glossology, s. 31.</note> Champollion-Figeac +reckons the most distinguishable dialects of +France at fourteen.<note place='foot'>Glossology, p. 33.</note> +The number of modern Greek dialects<note place='foot'>Ibid., p. 29.</note> +is carried by some as high as seventy, and +though many of these are hardly more than local varieties, +yet some, like the Tzaconic, differ from the literary +language as much as Doric differed from Attic. +<pb n='059'/><anchor id='Pg059'/> +In the island of Lesbos, villages distant from each other +not more than two or three hours have frequently peculiar +words of their own, and their own peculiar pronunciation.<note place='foot'>Nea +Pandora, 1859, Nos. 227, 229. Zeitschrift für Vergleichende +Sprachforschung, x. s. 190.</note> +But let us take a language which, though not +without a literature, has been less under the influence +of classical writers than Italian or French, and we shall +then see at once how abundant the growth of dialects! +The Friesian, which is spoken on a small area on the +north-western coast of Germany, between the Scheldt +and Jutland, and on the islands near the shore, which +has been spoken there for at least two thousand years,<note place='foot'>Grimm, +Geschichte der Deutschen Sprache, p. 668: Marsh, p. 379.</note> +and which possesses literary documents as old as the +twelfth century, is broken up into endless local dialects. +I quote from Kohl's Travels. <q>The commonest +things,</q> he writes, <q>which are named almost alike +all over Europe, receive quite different names in the +different Friesian Islands. Thus, in Amrum, <emph>father</emph> is +called <emph>aatj</emph>; on the Halligs, <emph>baba</emph> +or <emph>babe</emph>; in Sylt, <emph>foder</emph> +or <emph>vaar</emph>; in many districts on the main-land, <emph>täte</emph>; in +the eastern part of Föhr, <emph>oti</emph> or <emph>ohitj</emph>. Although these +people live within a couple of German miles from each +other, these words differ more than the Italian <emph>padre</emph> +and the English <emph>father</emph>. Even the names of their districts +and islands are totally different in different dialects. +The island of <emph>Sylt</emph> is called <emph>Söl</emph>, +<emph>Sol</emph>, and <emph>Sal</emph>.</q> +Each of these dialects, though it might be made out by +a Friesian scholar, is unintelligible except to the peasants +of each narrow district in which it prevails. What +is therefore generally called the Friesian language, and +described as such in Friesian grammars, is in reality +<pb n='060'/><anchor id='Pg060'/> +but one out of many dialects, though, no doubt, the +most important; and the same holds good with regard +to all so-called literary languages. +</p> + +<p> +It is a mistake to imagine that dialects are everywhere +corruptions of the literary language. Even in +England,<note place='foot'><q>Some people, who +may have been taught to consider the Dorset dialect +as having originated from corruption of the written English, may not +be prepared to hear that it is not only a separate offspring from the Anglo-Saxon +tongue, but purer, and in some cases richer, than the dialect which +is chosen as the national speech.</q>—Barnes, +<hi rend='italic'>Poems in Dorset Dialect</hi>, Preface, +p. xiv.</note> the local patois have many forms which are +more primitive than the language of Shakespeare, and +the richness of their vocabulary surpasses, on many +points, that of the classical writers of any period. +Dialects have always been the feeders rather than +the channels of a literary language; anyhow, they +are parallel streams which existed long before one +of them was raised to that temporary eminence which +is the result of literary cultivation. +</p> + +<p> +What Grimm says of the origin of dialects in general +applies only to such as are produced by phonetic corruption. +<q>Dialects,</q> he writes,<note place='foot'>Geschichte +der Deutschen Sprache, s. 833.</note> <q>develop themselves +progressively, and the more we look backward in the +history of language the smaller is their number, and the +less definite their features. All multiplicity arises gradually +from an original unity.</q> So it seems, indeed, +if we build our theories of language exclusively on the +materials supplied by literary idioms, such as Sanskrit, +Greek, Latin, and Gothic. No doubt these are the +royal heads in the history of language. But as political +history ought to be more than a chronicle of royal +dynasties, so the historian of language ought never to +<pb n='061'/><anchor id='Pg061'/> +lose sight of those lower and popular strata of speech +from which these dynasties originally sprang, and by +which alone they are supported. +</p> + +<p> +Here, however, lies the difficulty. How are we to +trace the history of dialects? In the ancient history +of language, literary dialects alone supply us with materials, +whereas the very existence of spoken dialects is +hardly noticed by ancient writers. +</p> + +<p> +We are told, indeed, by Pliny,<note place='foot'>Pliny, +vi. 5; Hervas, Catalogo, i. 118.</note> that in Colchis there +were more than three hundred tribes speaking different +dialects; and that the Romans, in order to carry on +any intercourse with the natives, had to employ a +hundred and thirty interpreters. This is probably an +exaggeration; but we have no reason to doubt the +statement of Strabo,<note place='foot'>Pliny +depends on Timosthenes, whom Strabo declares untrustworthy +(ii. p. 93, ed. Casaub.) Strabo himself says of Dioscurias, συνέρχεσθαι ἐς +αὐτὴν ἐβδομήκοντα, οἱ δὲ καὶ τριακόσια ἔθνη φασίν οἴς οὐδὲν τῶν ὄντων +υέλει (x. p. 498). The last words refer probably to +Timosthenes.</note> who speaks of seventy tribes living +together in that country, which, even now, is +called <q>the mountain of languages.</q> In modern times, +again, when missionaries have devoted themselves to +the study of the languages of savage and illiterate +tribes, they have seldom been able to do more than to +acquire one out of many dialects; and, when their exertions +have been at all successful, that dialect which +they had reduced to writing, and made the medium of +their civilizing influence, soon assumed a kind of literary +supremacy, so as to leave the rest behind as barbarous +jargons. Yet, whatever is known of the dialects +of savage tribes is chiefly or entirely due to missionaries; +and it is much to be desired that their attention +should again and again be directed to this interesting +<pb n='062'/><anchor id='Pg062'/> +problem of the dialectical life of language which they +alone have the means of elucidating. Gabriel Sagard, +who was sent as a missionary to the Hurons in 1626, +and published his <q>Grand Voyage du pays des Hurons,</q> +at Paris, in 1631, states that among these North +American tribes hardly one village speaks the same +language as another; nay, that two families of the +same village do not speak exactly the same language. +And he adds what is important, that their language +is changing every day, and is already so much changed +that the ancient Huron language is almost entirely different +from the present. During the last two hundred +years, on the contrary, the languages of the Hurons +and Iroquois are said not to have changed at +all.<note place='foot'>Du Ponceau, p. 110.</note> We +read of missionaries<note place='foot'>S. F. Waldeck, +Lettre à M. Jomard des environs de Palenqué, Amérique +Centrale. (<q>Il ne pouvait se servir, en 1833, d'un vocabulaire composé +avec beaucoup de soin dix ans auparavant.</q>)</note> in Central America who attempted +to write down the language of savage tribes, and who +compiled with great care a dictionary of all the words +they could lay hold of. Returning to the same tribe +after the lapse of only ten years, they found that this +dictionary had become antiquated and useless. Old +words had sunk to the ground, and new ones had risen +to the surface; and to all outward appearance the +language was completely changed. +</p> + +<p> +Nothing surprised the Jesuit missionaries so much +as the immense number of languages spoken by the +natives of America. But this, far from being a proof +of a high state of civilization, rather showed that the +various races of America had never submitted, for any +length of time, to a powerful political concentration, +and that they had never succeeded in founding great +<pb n='063'/><anchor id='Pg063'/> +national empires. Hervas reduces, indeed, all the +dialects of America to eleven families<note place='foot'>Catalogo, +i. 393.</note>—four for +the south, and seven for the north; but this could +be done only by the same careful and minute comparison +which enables us to class the idioms spoken +in Iceland and Ceylon as cognate dialects. For practical +purposes the dialects of America are distinct +dialects, and the people who speak them are mutually +unintelligible. +</p> + +<p> +We hear the same observations everywhere where +the rank growth of dialects has been watched by intelligent +observers. If we turn our eyes to Burmah, we +find that there the Burmese has produced a considerable +literature, and is the recognized medium of communication +not only in Burmah, but likewise in Pegu +and Arakan. But the intricate mountain ranges of the +peninsula of the Irawaddy<note place='foot'>Turanian +Languages, p. 114.</note> afford a safe refuge to many +independent tribes, speaking their own independent dialects; +and in the neighborhood of Manipura alone +Captain Gordon collected no less than twelve dialects. +<q>Some of them,</q> he says, <q>are spoken by no more +than thirty or forty families, yet so different from the +rest as to be unintelligible to the nearest neighborhood.</q> +Brown, the excellent American missionary, +who has spent his whole life in preaching the Gospel +in that part of the world, tells us that some tribes who +left their native village to settle in another valley, became +unintelligible to their forefathers in two or three +generations.<note place='foot'>Ibid., p. 233.</note> +</p> + +<p> +In the north of Asia the Ostiakes, as Messerschmidt +informs us, though really speaking the same language +<pb n='064'/><anchor id='Pg064'/> +everywhere, have produced so many words and forms +peculiar to each tribe, that even within the limits of +twelve or twenty German miles, communication among +them becomes extremely difficult. Castren, the heroic +explorer of the languages of northern and central +Asia,<note place='foot'>Turanian Languages, p. 30.</note> +assures us that some of the Mongolian dialects are actually +entering into a new phase of grammatical life; +and that while the literary language of the Mongolians +has no terminations for the persons of the verb, that +characteristic feature of Turanian speech had lately +broken out in the spoken dialects of the Buriates +and in the Tungusic idioms near Njertschinsk in +Siberia. +</p> + +<p> +One more observation of the same character from +the pen of Robert Moffat, in his <q>Missionary Scenes +and Labors in Southern Africa.</q> <q>The purity and +harmony of language,</q> he writes, <q>is kept up by their +pitches, or public meetings, by their festivals and ceremonies, +as well as by their songs and their constant +intercourse. With the isolated villagers of the desert +it is far otherwise; they have no such meetings; they +are compelled to traverse the wilds, often to a great +distance from their native village. On such occasions +fathers and mothers, and all who can bear a burden, +often set out for weeks at a time, and leave their children +to the care of two or three infirm old people. +The infant progeny, some of whom are beginning to +lisp, while others can just master a whole sentence, and +those still further advanced, romping and playing together, +the children of nature, through their livelong +day, <emph>become habituated to a language of their own</emph>. The +more voluble condescend to the less precocious; and +<pb n='065'/><anchor id='Pg065'/> +thus, from this infant Babel, proceeds a dialect of a +host of mongrel words and phrases, joined together +without rule, and <emph>in the course of one generation the entire +character of the language is changed</emph>.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Such is the life of language in a state of nature; and +in a similar manner, we have a right to conclude, languages +grew up which we only know after the bit and +bridle of literature were thrown over their necks. It +need not be a written or classical literature to give an +ascendency to one out of many dialects, and to impart +to its peculiarities an undisputed legitimacy. Speeches +at pitches or public meetings, popular ballads, national +laws, religious oracles, exercise, though to a smaller +extent, the same influence. They will arrest the natural +flow of language in the countless rivulets of its +dialects, and give a permanency to certain formations +of speech which, without these external influences, +could have enjoyed but an ephemeral existence. +Though we cannot fully enter, at present, on the problem +of the origin of language, yet this we can clearly +see, that, whatever the origin of language was, its first +tendency must have been towards an unbounded variety. +To this there was, however, a natural check, +which prepared from the very beginning the growth +of national and literary languages. The language of +the father became the language of a family; the language +of a family that of a clan. In one and the +same clan different families would preserve among +themselves their own familiar forms and expressions. +They would add new words, some so fanciful and +quaint as to be hardly intelligible to other members of +the same clan. Such expressions would naturally be +suppressed, as we suppress provincial peculiarities and +<pb n='066'/><anchor id='Pg066'/> +pet words of our own, at large assemblies where all +clansmen meet and are expected to take part in general +discussions. But they would be cherished all the more +round the fire of each tent, in proportion as the general +dialect of the clan assumed a more formal character. +Class dialects, too, would spring up; the dialects of +servants, grooms, shepherds, and soldiers. Women +would have their own household words; and the rising +generation would not be long without a more racy +phraseology of their own. Even we, in this literary +age, and at a distance of thousands of years from those +early fathers of language, do not speak at home as we +speak in public. The same circumstances which give +rise to the formal language of a clan, as distinguished +from the dialects of families, produce, on a larger scale, +the languages of a confederation of clans, of nascent +colonies, of rising nationalities. Before there is a national +language, there have always been hundreds of +dialects in districts, towns, villages, clans, and families; +and though the progress of civilization and centralization +tends to reduce their number and to soften their +features, it has not as yet annihilated them, even in +our own time. +</p> + +<p> +Let us now look again at what is commonly called +the history, but what ought to be called, the natural +growth, of language, and we shall easily see that it +consists chiefly in the play of the two principles which +we have just examined, <emph>phonetic decay</emph> and <emph>dialectical +regeneration</emph> or <emph>growth</emph>. Let us take the six Romance +languages. It is usual to call these the daughters of +Latin. I do not object to the names of parent and +daughter as applied to languages; only we must not +allow such apparently clear and simple terms to cover +<pb n='067'/><anchor id='Pg067'/> +obscure and vague conceptions. Now if we call Italian +the daughter of Latin, we do not mean to ascribe +to Italian a new vital principle. Not a single radical +element was newly created for the formation of Italian. +Italian is Latin in a new form. Italian is modern +Latin, or Latin ancient Italian. The names <emph>mother</emph> +and <emph>daughter</emph> only mark different periods in the growth +of a language substantially the same. To speak of +Latin dying in giving birth to her offspring is again +pure mythology, and it would be easy to prove that +Latin was a living language long after Italian had +learnt to run alone. Only let us clearly see what +we mean by Latin. The classical Latin is one out of +many dialects spoken by the Aryan inhabitants of +Italy. It was the dialect of Latium, in Latium the +dialect of Rome, at Rome the dialect of the patricians. +It was fixed by Livius Andronicus, Ennius, Nævius, +Cato, and Lucretius, polished by the Scipios, Hortensius, +and Cicero. It was the language of a restricted +class, of a political party, of a literary set. Before +their time, the language of Rome must have changed +and fluctuated considerably. Polybius tells us (iii. +22), that the best-informed Romans could not make +out without difficulty the language of the ancient +treaties between Rome and Carthage. Horace admits +(Ep. ii. 1, 86), that he could not understand the +old Salian poems, and he hints that no one else could. +Quintilian (i. 6, 40) says that the Salian priests could +hardly understand their sacred hymns. If the plebeians +had obtained the upperhand over the patricians, +Latin would have been very different from what it is +in Cicero, and we know that even Cicero, having been +brought up at Arpinum, had to give up some of his +<pb n='068'/><anchor id='Pg068'/> +provincial peculiarities, such as the dropping of the +final <emph>s</emph>, when he began to mix in fashionable society, +and had to write for his new patrician friends.<note place='foot'>Quintilian, +ix. 4. <q>Nam neque Lucilium putant uti eadem (s) ultima, +cum dicit Serenu fuit, et Dignu loco. Quin etiam Cicero in Oratore plures +antiquorum tradit sic locutos.</q> In some phrases the final <emph>s</emph> was omitted in +conversation; <hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi> <emph>abin</emph> for abisne, +<emph>viden</emph> for videsne, <emph>opu'st</emph> for opus est, +<emph>conabere</emph> for conaberis.</note> After +having been established as the language of legislation, +religion, literature, and general civilization, the classical +Latin dialect became stationary and stagnant. It +could not grow, because it was not allowed to change +or to deviate from its classical correctness. It was +haunted by its own ghost. Literary dialects, or what +are commonly called classical languages, pay for their +temporary greatness by inevitable decay. They are +like stagnant lakes at the side of great rivers. They +form reservoirs of what was once living and running +speech, but they are no longer carried on by the main +current. At times it may seem as if the whole stream +of language was absorbed by these lakes, and we can +hardly trace the small rivulets which run on in the +main bed. But if lower down, that is to say, later in +history, we meet again with a new body of stationary +language, forming or formed, we may be sure that its +tributaries were those very rivulets which for a time +were almost lost from our sight. Or it may be more +accurate to compare a classical or literary idiom with +the frozen surface of a river, brilliant and smooth, but +stiff and cold. It is mostly by political commotions +that this surface of the more polite and cultivated +speech is broken and carried away by the waters rising +underneath. It is during times when the higher classes +are either crushed in religious and social struggles, or +<pb n='069'/><anchor id='Pg069'/> +mix again with the lower classes to repel foreign invasion; +when literary occupations are discouraged, palaces +burnt, monasteries pillaged, and seats of learning +destroyed,—it is then that the popular, or, as they are +called, the vulgar dialects, which had formed a kind +of undercurrent, rise beneath the crystal surface of +the literary language, and sweep away, like the waters +in spring, the cumbrous formations of a by-gone age. +In more peaceful times, a new and popular literature +springs up in a language which <emph>seems</emph> to have been +formed by conquests or revolutions, but which, in +reality, had been growing up long before, and was +only brought out, ready made, by historical events. +From this point of view we can see that no literary +language can ever be said to have been the mother of +another language. As soon as a language loses its +unbounded capability of change, its carelessness about +what it throws away, and its readiness in always supplying +instantaneously the wants of mind and heart, its +natural life is changed into a merely artificial existence. +It may still live on for a long time, but while it seems +to be the leading shoot, it is in reality but a broken and +withering branch, slowly falling from the stock from +which it sprang. The sources of Italian are not to be +found in the classical literature of Rome, but in the +popular dialects of Italy. English did not spring from +the Anglo-Saxon of Wessex only, but from the dialects +spoken in every part of Great Britain, distinguished +by local peculiarities, and modified at different +times by the influence of Latin, Danish, Norman, +French, and other foreign elements. Some of the +local dialects of English, as spoken at the present day, +are of great importance for a critical study of English, +<pb n='070'/><anchor id='Pg070'/> +and a French prince, now living in this country, deserves +great credit for collecting what can still be saved +of English dialects. Hindustani is not the daughter +of Sanskrit, as we find it in the Vedas, or in the later +literature of the Brahmans: it is a branch of the living +speech of India, springing from the same stem +from which Sanskrit sprang, when it first assumed its +literary independence. +</p> + +<p> +While thus endeavoring to place the character of +dialects, as the feeders of language, in a clear light, I +may appear to some of my hearers to have exaggerated +their importance. No doubt, if my object had been +different, I might easily have shown that, without +literary cultivation, language would never have acquired +that settled character which is essential for the communication +of thought; that it would never have fulfilled +its highest purpose, but have remained the mere jargon +of shy troglodytes. But as the importance of literary +languages is not likely to be overlooked, whereas the +importance of dialects, as far as they sustain the growth +of language, had never been pointed out, I thought it +better to dwell on the advantages which literary languages +derive from dialects, rather than on the benefits +which dialects owe to literary languages. Besides, our +chief object to-day was to explain the growth of language, +and for that purpose it is impossible to exaggerate +the importance of the constant undergrowth of +dialects. Remove a language from its native soil, tear +it away from the dialects which are its feeders, and you +arrest at once its natural growth. There will still be +the progress of phonetic corruption, but no longer the +restoring influence of dialectic regeneration. The +language which the Norwegian refugees brought to +<pb n='071'/><anchor id='Pg071'/> +Iceland has remained almost the same for seven centuries, +whereas on its native soil, and surrounded by +local dialects, it has grown into two distinct languages, +the Swedish and Danish. In the eleventh century, +the languages of Sweden, Denmark, and Iceland are +supposed<note place='foot'>Marsh, Lectures, pp. 133, 368.</note> +to have been identical, nor can we appeal +to foreign conquest, or to the admixture of foreign with +native blood, in order to account for the changes which +the language underwent in Sweden and Denmark, but +not in Iceland.<note place='foot'><q>There are fewer +local peculiarities of form and articulation in our vast +extent of territory (U. S.), than on the comparatively narrow soil of Great +Britain.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Marsh</hi>, p. 667.</note> +</p> + +<p> +We can hardly form an idea of the unbounded resources +of dialects. When literary languages have +stereotyped one general term, their dialects will supply +fifty, though each with its own special shade of meaning. +If new combinations of thought are evolved in +the progress of society, dialects will readily supply the +required names from the store of their so-called superfluous +words. There are not only local and provincial, +but also class dialects. There is a dialect of shepherds, +of sportsmen, of soldiers, of farmers. I suppose there +are few persons here present who could tell the exact +meaning of a horse's poll, crest, withers, dock, hamstring, +cannon, pastern, coronet, arm, jowl, and muzzle. +Where the literary language speaks of the young +of all sorts of animals, farmers, shepherds, and sportsmen +would be ashamed to use so general a term. +</p> + +<p> +<q>The idiom of nomads,</q> as Grimm says, <q>contains +an abundant wealth of manifold expressions for sword +and weapons, and for the different stages in the life of +<pb n='072'/><anchor id='Pg072'/> +their cattle. In a more highly cultivated language +these expressions become burthensome and superfluous. +But, in a peasant's mouth, the bearing, calving, falling, +and killing of almost every animal has its own peculiar +term, as the sportsman delights in calling the gait and +members of game by different names. The eye of +these shepherds, who live in the free air, sees further, +their ear hears more sharply,—why should their speech +not have gained that living truth and variety?</q> +</p> + +<p> +Thus Juliana Berners, lady prioress of the nunnery +of Sopwell in the fifteenth century, the reputed author of +the book of St. Albans, informs us that we must not +use names of multitudes promiscuously, but we are to +say, <q>a congregacyon of people, a hoost of men, a felyshyppynge +of yomen, and a bevy of ladies; we must +speak of a herde of dere, swannys, cranys, or wrenys, +a sege of herons or bytourys, a muster of pecockes, a +watche of nyghtyngales, a flyghte of doves, a claterynge +of choughes, a pryde of lyons, a slewthe of +beeres, a gagle of geys, a skulke of foxes, a sculle of +frerys, a pontificality of prestys, a bomynable syght of +monkes, and a superfluyte of nonnes,</q> and so of other +human and brute assemblages. In like manner, in +dividing game for the table, the animals were not +carved, but <q>a dere was broken, a gose reryd, chekyn +frusshed, a cony unlaced, a crane dysplayed, a curlewe +unioynted, a quayle wynggyd, a swanne lyfte, a lambe +sholdered, a heron dysmembryd, a pecocke dysfygured, +a samon chynyd, a hadoke sydyd, a sole loynyd, and a +breme splayed.</q><note place='foot'>Marsh, Lectures, pp. 181, 590.</note> +</p> + +<p> +What, however, I wanted particularly to point out +in this lecture is this, that neither of the causes which +<pb n='073'/><anchor id='Pg073'/> +produce the growth, or, according to others, constitute +the history of language, is under the control of man. +The phonetic decay of language is not the result of +mere accident; it is governed by definite laws, as we +shall see when we come to consider the principles of +comparative grammar. But these laws were not made +by man; on the contrary, man had to obey them without +knowing of their existence. +</p> + +<p> +In the growth of the modern Romance languages +out of Latin, we can perceive not only a general tendency +to simplification, not only a natural disposition +to avoid the exertion which the pronunciation of certain +consonants, and still more, of groups of consonants, +entails on the speaker: but we can see distinct +laws for each of the Romance dialects, which enable +us to say, that in French the Latin <emph>patrem</emph> would +naturally grow into the modern <emph>père</emph>. The final <emph>m</emph> +is always dropped in the Romance dialects, and it was +dropped even in Latin. Thus we get <emph>patre</emph> instead of +<emph>patrem</emph>. Now, a Latin <emph>t</emph> between two vowels in such +words as <emph>pater</emph> is invariably suppressed in French. +This is a law, and by means of it we can discover at +once that <emph>catena</emph> must become <emph>chaine</emph>; +<emph>fata</emph>, a later feminine +representation of the old neuter <emph>fatum</emph>, <emph>fée</emph>; <emph>pratum</emph> +a meadow, <emph>pré</emph>. From <emph>pratum</emph> we derive <emph>prataria</emph>, +which in French becomes <emph>prairie</emph>; from <emph>fatum</emph>, +<emph>fataria</emph>, +the English <emph>fairy</emph>. Thus every Latin participle in +<emph>atus</emph>, like <emph>amatus</emph>, loved, must end in French in <emph>é</emph>. +The same law then changed <emph>patre</emph>(pronounced <emph>pa-tere</emph>) +into <emph>paere</emph>, or <emph>père</emph>; it changed +<emph>matrem</emph> into <emph>mère</emph>, +<emph>fratrem</emph> into <emph>frère</emph>. These changes take place gradually +but irresistibly, and, what is most important, they +are completely beyond the reach or control of the free +will of man. +</p> + +<pb n='074'/><anchor id='Pg074'/> + +<p> +Dialectical growth again is still more beyond the control +of individuals. For although a poet may knowingly +and intentionally invent a new word, its acceptance +depends on circumstances which defy individual +interference. There are some changes in the +grammar which at first sight might seem to be mainly +attributable to the caprice of the speaker. Granted, +for instance, that the loss of the Latin terminations +was the natural result of a more careless pronunciation; +granted that the modern sign of the French +genitive <emph>du</emph> is a natural corruption of the Latin <emph>de +illo</emph>,—yet the choice of <emph>de</emph>, instead of any other word, +to express the genitive, the choice of <emph>illo</emph>, instead of +any other pronoun, to express the article, might seem +to prove that man acted as a free agent in the formation +of language. But it is not so. No single individual +could deliberately have set to work in order +to abolish the old Latin genitive, and to replace it by +the periphrastic compound <emph>de illo</emph>. It was necessary +that the inconvenience of having no distinct or distinguishable +sign of the genitive should have been felt by +the people who spoke a vulgar Latin dialect. It was +necessary that the same people should have used the +preposition <emph>de</emph> in such a manner as to lose sight of its +original local meaning altogether (for instance, <emph>una de +multis</emph>, in Horace, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>, one out of many). It was +necessary, again, that the same people should have +felt the want of an article, and should have used <emph>illo</emph> +in numerous expressions, where it seemed to have +lost its original pronominal power. It was necessary +that all these conditions should be given, before +one individual and after him another, and after +him hundreds and thousands and millions, could use +<pb n='075'/><anchor id='Pg075'/> +<emph>de illo</emph> as the exponent of the genitive; and change +it into the Italian <emph>dello</emph>, <emph>del</emph>, and the French <emph>du</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +The attempts of single grammarians and purists to +improve language are perfectly bootless; and we shall +probably hear no more of schemes to prune languages +of their irregularities. It is very likely, however, that +the gradual disappearance of irregular declensions and +conjugations is due, in literary as well as in illiterate +languages, to the dialect of children. The language +of children is more regular than our own. I have +heard children say <emph>badder</emph> and <emph>baddest</emph>, instead of +<emph>worse</emph> and <emph>worst</emph>. Children will +say, <emph>I gaed</emph>, <emph>I coomd</emph>, +<emph>I catched</emph>; and it is this sense of grammatical justice, +this generous feeling of what ought to be, which in +the course of centuries has eliminated many so-called +irregular forms. Thus the auxiliary verb in Latin was +very irregular. If <emph>sumus</emph> is <emph>we are</emph>, and +<emph>sunt</emph>, <emph>they are</emph>, +the second person, <emph>you are</emph>, ought to have been, at least +according to the strict logic of children, <emph>sutis</emph>. This, +no doubt, sounds very barbarous to a classical ear accustomed +to <emph>estis</emph>. And we see how French, for instance, +has strictly preserved the Latin forms in <emph>nous +sommes</emph>, <emph>vous êtes</emph>, <emph>ils sont</emph>. But in Spanish we find +<emph>somos</emph>, <emph>sois</emph>, <emph>son</emph>; +and this <emph>sois</emph> stands for <emph>sutis</emph>. We +find similar traces of grammatical levelling in the +Italian <emph>siamo</emph>, <emph>siete</emph>, <emph>sono</emph>, +formed in analogy of regular verbs such as <emph>crediamo</emph>, +<emph>credete</emph>, <emph>credono</emph>. The second +person, <emph>sei</emph>, instead of <emph>es</emph>, is likewise infantine grammar. +So are the Wallachian <emph>súntemu</emph>, we are, <emph>súnteti</emph>, you are, +which owe their origin to the third person plural <emph>súnt</emph>, +they are. And what shall we say of such monsters as +<emph>essendo</emph>, a gerund derived on principles of strict justice +from an infinitive <emph>essere</emph>, like <emph>credendo</emph> +from <emph>credere</emph>! +</p> + +<pb n='076'/><anchor id='Pg076'/> + +<p> +However, we need not be surprised, for we find similar +barbarisms in English. Even in Anglo-Saxon, the +third person plural, <emph>sind</emph>, has by a false analogy been +transferred to the first and second persons; and instead +of the modern English, +</p> + +<table rend="latexcolumns: 'l l l l'; tblcolumns: 'lw(10) lw(10) lw(10) lw(10)'"> +<row><cell></cell><cell></cell><cell>in Old Norse.</cell><cell>in Gothic.</cell></row> +<row><cell>we are</cell><cell></cell><cell>ër-um</cell><cell>sijum<note place='foot'>The +Gothic forms <emph>sijum</emph>, <emph>sijuth</emph>, are not organic. They are either +derived by false analogy from the third person plural <emph>sind</emph>, or +a new base <emph>sij</emph> was derived from the subjunctive <emph>sijau</emph>, +Sanskrit <emph>syâm</emph>.</note></cell></row> +<row><cell>you are</cell><cell>we find</cell><cell>ër-udh</cell><cell>sijuth</cell></row> +<row><cell>they are</cell><cell></cell><cell>ër-u.</cell><cell>sind.</cell></row> +</table> + +<p> +Dialectically we hear <emph>I be</emph>, instead of <emph>I am</emph>; and if +Chartism should ever gain the upper hand, we must be +prepared for newspapers adopting such forms as <emph>I says</emph>, +<emph>I knows</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +These various influences and conditions under which +language grows and changes, are like the waves and +winds which carry deposits to the bottom of the sea, +where they accumulate, and rise, and grow, and at last +appear on the surface of the earth as a stratum, perfectly +intelligible in all its component parts, not produced +by an inward principle of growth, nor regulated +by invariable laws of nature; yet, on the other hand, +by no means the result of mere accident, or the production +of lawless and uncontrolled agencies. We +cannot be careful enough in the use of our words. +Strictly speaking, neither <emph>history</emph> nor <emph>growth</emph> is applicable +to the changes of the shifting surface of the earth. +<emph>History</emph> applies to the actions of free agents; <emph>growth</emph> to +the natural unfolding of organic beings. We speak, +however, of the growth of the crust of the earth, and +we know what we mean by it; and it is in this sense, +<pb n='077'/><anchor id='Pg077'/> +but not in the sense of growth as applied to a tree, that +we have a right to speak of the growth of language. +If that modification which takes place in time by continually +new combinations of given elements, which +withdraws itself from the control of free agents, and +can in the end be recognized as the result of natural +agencies, may be called growth; and if so defined, we +may apply it to the growth of the crust of the earth; +the same word, in the same sense, will be applicable to +language, and will justify us in removing the science +of language from the pale of the historical to that of +the physical sciences. +</p> + +<p> +There is another objection which we have to consider, +and the consideration of which will again help +us to understand more clearly the real character of +language. The great periods in the growth of the +earth which have been established by geological research +are brought to their close, or very nearly so, +when we discover the first vestiges of human life, and +when the history of man, in the widest sense of the +word, begins. The periods in the growth of language, +on the contrary, begin and run parallel with the history +of man. It has been said, therefore, that although +language may not be merely a work of art, it would, +nevertheless, be impossible to understand the life and +growth of any language without an historical knowledge +of the times in which that language grew up. +We ought to know, it is said, whether a language +which is to be analyzed under the microscope of comparative +grammar, has been growing up wild, among +wild tribes, without a literature, oral or written, in +poetry or in prose; or whether it has received the cultivation +of poets, priests, and orators, and retained the +<pb n='078'/><anchor id='Pg078'/> +impress of a classical age. Again, it is only from the +annals of political history that we can learn whether +one language has come in contact with another, how +long this contact has lasted, which of the two nations +stood higher in civilization, which was the conquering +and which the conquered, which of the two established +the laws, the religion, and the arts of the country, +and which produced the greatest number of national +teachers, popular poets, and successful demagogues. +All these questions are of a purely historical character, +and the science which has to borrow so much from +historical sources, might well be considered an anomaly +in the sphere of the physical sciences. +</p> + +<p> +Now, in answer to this, it cannot be denied that +among the physical sciences none is so intimately connected +with the history of man as the science of language. +But a similar connection, though in a less +degree, can be shown to exist between other branches +of physical research and the history of man. In +zoölogy, for instance, it is of some importance to know +at what particular period of history, in what country, +and for what purposes certain animals were tamed and +domesticated. In ethnology, a science, we may remark +in passing, quite distinct from the science of +language, it would be difficult to account for the Caucasian +stamp impressed on the Mongolian race in +Hungary, or on the Tatar race in Turkey, unless we +knew from written documents the migrations and settlements +of the Mongolic and Tataric tribes in Europe. +A botanist, again, comparing several specimens of rye, +would find it difficult to account for their respective +peculiarities, unless he knew that in some parts of the +world this plant has been cultivated for centuries, +<pb n='079'/><anchor id='Pg079'/> +whereas in other regions, as, for instance, in Mount +Caucasus, it is still allowed to grow wild. Plants +have their own countries, like races, and the presence +of the cucumber in Greece, the orange and cherry in +Italy, the potatoe in England, and the vine at the Cape, +can be fully explained by the historian only. The +more intimate relation, therefore, between the history +of language and the history of man is not sufficient to +exclude the science of language from the circle of the +physical sciences. +</p> + +<p> +Nay, it might be shown, that, if strictly defined, the +science of language can declare itself completely independent +of history. If we speak of the language of +England, we ought, no doubt, to know something of +the political history of the British Isles, in order to +understand the present state of that language. Its history +begins with the early Britons, who spoke a Celtic +dialect; it carries us on to the Saxon conquest, to the +Danish invasions, to the Norman conquest: and we +see how each of these political events contributed to +the formation of the character of the language. The +language of England may be said to have been in succession +Celtic, Saxon, Norman, and English. But if +we speak of the history of the English language, we +enter on totally different ground. The English language +was never Celtic, the Celtic never grew into +Saxon, nor the Saxon into Norman, nor the Norman +into English. The history of the Celtic language runs +on to the present day. It matters not whether it be +spoken by all the inhabitants of the British Isles, or +only by a small minority in Wales, Ireland, and Scotland. +A language, as long as it is spoken by anybody, +lives and has its substantive existence. The last +<pb n='080'/><anchor id='Pg080'/> +old woman that spoke Cornish, and to whose memory +it is now intended to raise a monument, represented by +herself alone the ancient language of Cornwall. A +Celt may become an Englishman, Celtic and English +blood may be mixed; and who could tell at the present +day the exact proportion of Celtic and Saxon +blood in the population of England? But languages +are never mixed. It is indifferent by what name +the language spoken in the British Islands be called, +whether English or British or Saxon; to the student +of language English is Teutonic, and nothing but +Teutonic. The physiologist may protest, and point +out that in many instances the skull, or the bodily +habitat of the English language, is of a Celtic type; +the genealogist may protest and prove that the arms +of many an English family are of Norman origin; the +student of language must follow his own way. Historical +information as to an early substratum of Celtic +inhabitants in Britain, as to Saxon, Danish, and Norman +invasions may be useful to him. But though +every record were burned, and every skull mouldered, +the English language, as spoken by any ploughboy, +would reveal its own history, if analyzed according to +the rules of comparative grammar. Without the help +of history, we should see that English is Teutonic, +that like Dutch and Friesian it belongs to the Low-German +branch; that this branch, together with the +High-German, Gothic, and Scandinavian branches, +constitute the Teutonic class; that this Teutonic class, +together with the Celtic, Slavonic, the Hellenic, Italic, +Iranic, and Indic classes constitute the great Indo-European +or Aryan family of speech. In the English +dictionary the student of the science of language +<pb n='081'/><anchor id='Pg081'/> +can detect, by his own tests, Celtic, Norman, Greek, +and Latin ingredients, but not a single drop of foreign +blood has entered into the organic system of the English +language. The grammar, the blood and soul of +the language, is as pure and unmixed in English as +spoken in the British Isles, as it was when spoken on +the shores of the German Ocean by the Angles, Saxons, +and Juts of the continent. +</p> + +<p> +In thus considering and refuting the objections which +have been, or might be, made against the admission of +the science of language into the circle of the physical +sciences, we have arrived at some results which it may +be useful to recapitulate before we proceed further. +We saw that whereas philology treats language only as +a means, comparative philology chooses language as the +object of scientific inquiry. It is not the study of one +language, but of many, and in the end of all, which +forms the aim of this new science. Nor is the language +of Homer of greater interest, in the scientific +treatment of human speech, than the dialect of the +Hottentots. +</p> + +<p> +We saw, secondly, that after the first practical acquisition +and careful analysis of the facts and forms of +any language, the next and most important step is the +classification of all the varieties of human speech, and +that only after this has been accomplished would it be +safe to venture on the great questions which underlie +all physical research, the questions as to the what, the +whence, and the why of language. +</p> + +<p> +We saw, thirdly, that there is a distinction between +what is called history and growth. We determined the +true meaning of growth, as applied to language, and +perceived how it was independent of the caprice of +<pb n='082'/><anchor id='Pg082'/> +man, and governed by laws that could be discovered +by careful observation, and be traced back in the end +to higher laws, which govern the organs both of human +thought, and of the human voice. Though admitting +that the science of language was more intimately connected +than any other physical science with what is +called the political history of man, we found that, +strictly speaking, our science might well dispense with +this auxiliary, and that languages can be analyzed and +classified on their own evidence particularly on the +strength of their grammatical articulation, without +any reference to the individuals, families, clans, tribes, +nations, or races by whom they are or have been +spoken. +</p> + +<p> +In the course of these considerations, we had to lay +down two axioms, to which we shall frequently have to +appeal in the progress of our investigations. The first +declares grammar to be the most essential element, and +therefore the ground of classification in all languages +which have produced a definite grammatical articulation; +the second denies the possibility of a mixed +language. +</p> + +<p> +These two axioms are, in reality, but one, as we +shall see when we examine them more closely. +There is hardly a language which in one sense may +not be called a mixed language. No nation or tribe +was ever so completely isolated as not to admit the +importation of a certain number of foreign words. +In some instances these imported words have changed +the whole native aspect of the language, and have +even acquired a majority over the native element. +Turkish is a Turanian dialect; its grammar is purely +Tataric or Turanian. The Turks, however, possessed +<pb n='083'/><anchor id='Pg083'/> +but a small literature and narrow civilization +before they were converted to Mohammedanism. Now, +the language of Mohammed was Arabic, a branch of +the Semitic family, closely allied to Hebrew and Syriac. +Together with the Koran, and their law and religion, +the Turks learned from the Arabs, their conquerors, +many of the arts and sciences connected with a more +advanced stage of civilization. Arabic became to the +Turks what Latin was to the Germans during the +Middle Ages; and there is hardly a word in the higher +intellectual terminology of Arabic, that might not be +used, more or less naturally, by a writer in Turkish. +But the Arabs, again, at the very outset of their career +of conquest and conversion, had been, in science, art, +literature, and polite manners, the pupils of the Persians, +whom they had conquered; they stood to them in +the same relation as the Romans stood to the Greeks. +Now, the Persians speak a language which is neither +Semitic, like Arabic, nor Turanian, like Turkish; it is +a branch of the Indo-European or Aryan family of +speech. A large infusion of Persian words thus found +its way into Arabic, and through Arabic into Turkish; +and the result is that at the present moment the Turkish +language, as spoken by the higher ranks at Constantinople, +is so entirely overgrown with Persian and Arabic +words, that a common clod from the country understands +but little of the so-called Osmanli, though its +grammar is exactly the same as the grammar which he +uses in his Tataric utterance. +</p> + +<p> +There is, perhaps, no language so full of words evidently +derived from the most distant sources as English. +Every country of the globe seems to have brought some +of its verbal manufactures to the intellectual market of +<pb n='084'/><anchor id='Pg084'/> +England. Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Celtic, Saxon, Danish, +French, Spanish, Italian, German—nay, even Hindustani, +Malay, and Chinese words, lie mixed together +in the English dictionary. On the evidence of words +alone it would be impossible to classify English with +any other of the established stocks and stems of human +speech. Leaving out of consideration the smaller ingredients, +we find, on comparing the Teutonic with +the Latin, or Neo-Latin or Norman elements in English, +that the latter have a decided majority over the +home-grown Saxon terms. This may seem incredible; +and if we simply took a page of any English book, and +counted therein the words of purely Saxon and Latin +origin, the majority would be no doubt on the Saxon +side. The articles, pronouns, prepositions, and auxiliary +verbs, all of which are of Saxon growth, occur +over and over again in one and the same page. Thus, +Hickes maintained that nine tenths of the English dictionary +were Saxon, because there were only three +words of Latin origin in the Lord's prayer. Sharon +Turner, who extended his observations over a larger +field, came to the conclusion that the relation of Norman +to Saxon was as four to six. Another writer, +who estimates the whole number of English words at +38,000, assigns 23,000 to a Saxon, and 15,000 to a +classical source. On taking, however, a more accurate +inventory, and counting every word in the dictionaries +of Robertson and Webster, M. Thommerel +has established the fact that of the sum total of 43,566 +words, 29,853 came from classical, 13,230 from Teutonic, +and the rest from miscellaneous sources.<note place='foot'>Some +excellent statistics on the exact proportion of Saxon and Latin +in various English writers, are to be found in Marsh's Lectures on the English +Language, p. 120, <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi> and 181, +<hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi></note> On the +<pb n='085'/><anchor id='Pg085'/> +evidence of its dictionary, therefore, and treating English +as a mixed language, it would have to be classified +together with French, Italian, and Spanish, as one of +the Romance or Neo-Latin dialects. Languages, however, +though mixed in their dictionary, can never be +mixed in their grammar. Hervas was told by missionaries +that in the middle of the eighteenth century the +Araucans used hardly a single word which was not Spanish, +though they preserved both the grammar and the +syntax of their own native speech.<note place='foot'><q>En este +estado, que es el primer paso que las naciones dan para mudar +de lengua, estaba quarenta años ha la araucana en las islas de Chiloue (como +he oido á los jesuitas sus misioneros), en donde los araucanos apénas proferian +palabra que no fuese española; mas la proferian con el artificio y órden +de su lengua nativa, llamada araucana.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Hervas, +Catalogo</hi>, t. i. p. 16. +<q>Este artificio ha sido en mi observacion el principal medio de que me he +valido para conocer la afinidad ó diferencia de las lenguas conocidas, y reducirlas +á determinadas classes.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Ibid.</hi>, p. 23.</note> +This is the reason +why grammar is made the criterion of the relationship +and the base of the classification in almost all languages; +and it follows, therefore, as a matter of course, +that in the classification and in the science of language, +it is impossible to admit the existence of a mixed idiom. +We may form whole sentences in English consisting entirely +of Latin or Romance words; yet whatever there +is left of grammar in English bears unmistakable traces +of Teutonic workmanship. What may now be called +grammar in English is little more than the terminations +of the genitive singular, and nominative plural +of nouns, the degrees of comparison, and a few of the +persons and tenses of the verb. Yet the single <emph>s</emph>, used +as the exponent of the third person singular of the indicative +present, is irrefragable evidence that in a scientific +classification of languages, English, though it did +not retain a single word of Saxon origin, would have +<pb n='086'/><anchor id='Pg086'/> +to be classed as Saxon, and as a branch of the great +Teutonic stem of the Aryan family of speech. In ancient +and less matured languages, grammar, or the +formal part of human speech, is far more abundantly +developed than in English; and it is, therefore, a much +safer guide for discovering a family likeness in scattered +members of the same family. There are languages in +which there is no trace of what we are accustomed to +call grammar; for instance, ancient Chinese; there are +others in which we can still watch the growth of grammar, +or, more correctly, the gradual lapse of material +into merely formal elements. In these languages new +principles of classification will have to be applied, such +as are suggested by the study of natural history; and +we shall have to be satisfied with the criteria of a morphological +affinity, instead of those of a genealogical +relationship. +</p> + +<p> +I have thus answered, I hope, some of the objections +which threatened to deprive the science of language of +that place which she claims in the circle of the physical +sciences. We shall see in our next lecture what the +history of our science has been from its beginning to +the present day, and how far it may be said to have +passed through the three stages, the empirical, the classificatory, +and the theoretical, which mark the childhood, +the youth, and the manhood of every one of the +natural sciences. +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='087'/><anchor id='Pg087'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Lecture III. The Empirical Stage.</head> + +<p> +We begin to-day to trace the historical progress of +the science of language in its three stages, the <emph>Empirical</emph>, +the <emph>Classificatory</emph>, and the <emph>Theoretical</emph>. As a general +rule each physical science begins with analysis, proceeds +to classification, and ends with theory; but, as I +pointed out in my first lecture, there are frequent exceptions +to this rule, and it is by no means uncommon to find +that philosophical speculations, which properly belong +to the last or theoretical stage, were attempted in physical +sciences long before the necessary evidence had +been collected or arranged. Thus, we find that the +science of language, in the only two countries where +we can watch its origin and history—in India and +Greece—rushes at once into theories about the mysterious +nature of speech, and cares as little for facts +as the man who wrote an account of the camel without +ever having seen the animal or the desert. The +Brahmans, in the hymns of the Veda, raised language +to the rank of a deity, as they did with all things of +which they knew not what they were. They addressed +hymns to her in which she is said to have +been with the gods from the beginning, achieving +wondrous things, and never revealed to man except +in part. In the Bráhmaņas, language is called the +<pb n='088'/><anchor id='Pg088'/> +cow, breath the bull, and their young is said to be +the mind of man.<note place='foot'>Colebrooke, Miscellaneous +Essays, i. 32. The following verses are pronounced +by Vâch, the goddess of speech, in the 125th hymn of the 10th +book of the Rig-Veda: <q>Even I myself say this (what is) welcome to Gods +and to men: <q>Whom I love, him I make strong, him I make a Brahman, +him a great prophet, him I make wise. For Rudra (the god of thunder) I +bend the bow, to slay the enemy, the hater of the Brahmans. For the +people I make war; I pervade heaven and earth. I bear the father on the +summit of this world; my origin is in the water in the sea; from thence I +go forth among all beings, and touch this heaven with my height. I myself +breathe forth like the wind, embracing all beings; above this heaven, +beyond this earth, such am I in greatness.</q></q> See also Atharva-Veda, iv. +30; xix. 9, 3. Muir, Sanskrit Texts, part iii. pp. 108, +150.</note> Brahman, the highest being, is +said to be known through speech, nay, speech herself +is called the Supreme Brahman. At a very early +period, however, the Brahmans recovered from their +raptures about language, and set to work with wonderful +skill dissecting her sacred body. Their achievements +in grammatical analysis, which date from the +sixth century, <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi>, are still unsurpassed in the grammatical +literature of any nation. The idea of reducing +a whole language to a small number of roots, +which in Europe was not attempted before the sixteenth +century by Henry Estienne,<note place='foot'>Sir +John Stoddart, Glossology, p. 276.</note> was perfectly +familiar to the Brahmans, at least 500 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi> +</p> + +<p> +The Greeks, though they did not raise language to +the rank of a deity, paid her, nevertheless, the greatest +honors in their ancient schools of philosophy. There +is hardly one of their representative philosophers who +has not left some saying on the nature of language. +The world without, or nature, and the world within, +or mind, did not excite more wonder and elicit deeper +oracles of wisdom from the ancient sages of Greece +than language, the image of both, of nature and of +<pb n='089'/><anchor id='Pg089'/> +mind. <q>What is language?</q> was a question asked +quite as early as <q>What am I?</q> and, <q>What is all this +world around me?</q> The problem of language was +in fact a recognized battle-field for the different schools +of ancient Greek philosophy, and we shall have to +glance at their early guesses on the nature of human +speech, when we come to consider the third or theoretical +stage in the science of language. +</p> + +<p> +At present, we have to look for the early traces of +the first or empirical stage. And here it might seem +doubtful what was the real work to be assigned to +this stage. What can be meant by the empirical treatment +of language? Who were the men that did for +language what the sailor did for his stars, the miner for +his minerals, the gardener for his flowers? Who was +the first to give any thought to language?—to distinguish +between its component parts, between nouns and +verbs, between articles and pronouns, between the nominative +and accusative, the active and passive? Who +invented these terms, and for what purpose were they +invented? +</p> + +<p> +We must be careful in answering these questions, +for, as I said before, the merely empirical analysis of +language was preceded in Greece by more general inquiries +into the nature of thought and language; and +the result has been that many of the technical terms +which form the nomenclature of empirical grammar, +existed in the schools of philosophy long before they +were handed over, ready made, to the grammarian. +The distinction of noun and verb, or more correctly, +of subject and predicate, was the work of philosophers. +Even the technical terms of case, of number, and gender, +were coined at a very early time for the purpose +<pb n='090'/><anchor id='Pg090'/> +of entering into the nature of thought; not for the +practical purpose of analyzing the forms of language. +This, their practical application to the spoken language +of Greece, was the work of a later generation. It was +the teacher of languages who first compared the categories +of thought with the realities of the Greek language. +It was he who transferred the terminology of +Aristotle and the Stoics from thought to speech, from +logic to grammar; and thus opened the first roads +into the impervious wilderness of spoken speech. In +doing this, the grammarian had to alter the strict acceptation +of many of the terms which he borrowed +from the philosopher, and he had to coin others before +he could lay hold of all the facts of language even in the +roughest manner. For, indeed, the distinction between +noun and verb, between active and passive, between +nominative and accusative, does not help us much towards +a scientific analysis of language. It is no more +than a first grasp, and it can only be compared with +the most elementary terminology in other branches of +human knowledge. Nevertheless, it was a beginning, +a very important beginning; and if we preserve in our +histories of the world the names of those who are said +to have discovered the four physical elements, the +names of a Thales and Anaximenes, we ought not +to forget the names of the discoverers of the elements +of language—the founders of one of the most useful +and most successful branches of philosophy—the first +Grammarians. +</p> + +<p> +Grammar then, in the usual sense of the word, or +the merely formal and empirical analysis of language, +owes its origin, like all other sciences, to a very natural +and practical want. The first practical grammarian +<pb n='091'/><anchor id='Pg091'/> +was the first practical teacher of languages, and if +we want to know the beginnings of the science of +language, we must try to find out at what time in +the history of the world, and under what circumstances, +people first thought of learning any language +besides their own. At <emph>that</emph> time we shall find the +first practical grammar, and not till then. Much +may have been ready at hand through the less interested +researches of philosophers, and likewise through +the critical studies of the scholars of Alexandria on +the ancient forms of their language as preserved in +the Homeric poems. But rules of declension and +conjugation, paradigms of regular and irregular nouns +and verbs, observations on syntax, and the like, these +are the work of the teachers of languages, and of no +one else. +</p> + +<p> +Now, the teaching of languages, though at present +so large a profession, is comparatively a very modern +invention. No ancient Greek ever thought of learning +a foreign language. Why should he? He divided the +whole world into Greeks and Barbarians, and he would +have felt himself degraded by adopting either the dress +or the manners or the language of his barbarian neighbors. +He considered it a privilege to speak Greek, and +even dialects closely related to his own, were treated +by him as mere jargons. It takes time before people +conceive the idea that it is possible to express oneself +in any but one's own language. The Poles called +their neighbors, the Germans, <emph>Niemiec</emph>, <emph>niemy</emph> meaning +<emph>dumb</emph>;<note place='foot'>The Turks applied the Polish +name <emph>Niemiec</emph> to the Austrians. As early +as Constantinus Porphyrogeneta, cap. 30, Νεμέτζιοι was used for the German +race of the Bavarians. (Pott, Indo-Germ. Sp. s. 44. Leo, Zeitschrift +für Vergleichende Sprachforschung, b. ii. s. 258.) Russian, +<emph>njemez'</emph>; Slovenian, <emph>nĕmec</emph>; Bulgarian, <emph>némec</emph>; +Polish, <emph>niemiec</emph>; Lusatian, <emph>njemc</emph>, mean +German. Russian, <emph>njemo</emph>, indistinct; <emph>njemyi</emph>, +dumb; Slovenian, <emph>nĕm</emph>, dumb; +Bulgarian, <emph>nêm</emph>, dumb; Polish, <emph>njemy</emph>, +dumb; Lusatian, <emph>njemy</emph>, dumb.</note> just as the Greeks called the Barbarians +<pb n='092'/><anchor id='Pg092'/> +<emph>Aglossoi</emph>, or speechless. The name which the Germans +gave to their neighbors, the Celts, <emph>Walh</emph> in old +High German, <emph>vealh</emph> in Anglo-Saxon, the modern +<emph>Welsh</emph>, is supposed to be the same as the Sanskrit +<emph>mlechha</emph>, and means a person who talks +indistinctly.<note place='foot'>Leo, Zeitschrift für Vergl. Sprachf. b. ii. s. 252.</note> +</p> + +<p> +Even when the Greeks began to feel the necessity +of communicating with foreign nations, when they +felt a desire of learning their idioms, the problem was +by no means solved. For how was a foreign language +to be learnt as long as either party could only speak +their own? The problem was almost as difficult as +when, as we are told by some persons, the first men, +as yet speechless, came together in order to invent +speech, and to discuss the most appropriate names +that should be given to the perceptions of the senses +and the abstractions of the mind. At first, it must +be supposed that the Greek learned foreign languages +very much as children learn their own. The interpreters +mentioned by ancient historians were probably +children of parents speaking different languages. The +son of a Scythian and a Greek would naturally learn +the utterances both of his father and mother, and the +lucrative nature of his services would not fail to increase +the supply. We are told, though on rather +mythical authority, that the Greeks were astonished +at the multiplicity of languages which they encountered +during the Argonautic expedition, and that they +were much inconvenienced by the want of skilful +interpreters.<note place='foot'>Humboldt's Cosmos, vol. ii. p. 141.</note> +We need not wonder at this, for the +<pb n='093'/><anchor id='Pg093'/> +English army was hardly better off than the army +of Jason; and such is the variety of dialects spoken +in the Caucasian Isthmus, that it is still called by the +inhabitants <q>the Mountain of Languages.</q> If we turn +our eyes from these mythical ages to the historical times +of Greece, we find that trade gave the first encouragement +to the profession of interpreters. Herodotus tells +us (iv. 24), that caravans of Greek merchants, following +the course of the Volga upwards to the Oural +mountains, were accompanied by seven interpreters, +speaking seven different languages. These must have +comprised Slavonic, Tataric, and Finnic dialects, spoken +in those countries in the time of Herodotus, as they are +at the present day. The wars with Persia first familiarized +the Greeks with the idea that other nations also +possessed real languages. Themistocles studied Persian, +and is said to have spoken it fluently. The expedition +of Alexander contributed still more powerfully +to a knowledge of other nations and languages. But +when Alexander went to converse with the Brahmans, +who were even then considered by the Greeks as the +guardians of a most ancient and mysterious wisdom, +their answers had to be translated by so many interpreters +that one of the Brahmans remarked, they must +become like water that had passed through many impure +channels.<note place='foot'>This shows how difficult it would be to admit that any +influence was exercised by Indian on Greek philosophers. Pyrrhon, if we may believe +Alexander Polyhistor, seems indeed to have accompanied Alexander on his +expedition to India, and one feels tempted to connect the scepticism of +Pyrrhon with the system of Buddhist philosophy then current in India. +But the ignorance of the language on both sides must have been an insurmountable +barrier between the Greek and the Indian thinkers. (Fragmenta +Histor. Græc., ed. Müller, t. iii. p. 243, <hi rend='italic'>b.</hi>; +Lasson, Indische Alterthumskande, +b. iii. s. 380.)</note> We hear, indeed, of more ancient +<pb n='094'/><anchor id='Pg094'/> +Greek travellers, and it is difficult to understand how, +in those early times, anybody could have travelled without +a certain knowledge of the language of the people +through whose camps and villages and towns he +had to pass. Many of these travels, however, particularly +those which are said to have extended as +far as India, are mere inventions of later writers.<note place='foot'>On +the supposed travels of Greek philosophers to India, see Lassen, Indische +Alterthumskunde, b. iii. s. 379; Brandis, Handbuch der Geschichte +der Philosophie, b. i. s. 425. The opinion of D. Stewart and Niebuhr that +the Indian philosophers borrowed from the Greeks, and that of Görres and +others that the Greeks borrowed from the Brahmans, are examined in my +Essay on Indian Logic, in Thomson's Laws of Thought.</note> +Lycurgus may have travelled to Spain and Africa, +he certainly did not proceed to India, nor is there +any mention of his intercourse with the Indian Gymnosophists +before Aristocrates, who lived about 100 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi> +The travels of Pythagoras are equally mythical; they +are inventions of Alexandrian writers, who believed +that all wisdom must have flowed from the East. +There is better authority for believing that Democritus +went to Egypt and Babylon, but his more distant +travels to India are likewise legendary. Herodotus, +though he travelled in Egypt and Persia, never +gives us to understand that he was able to converse +in any but his own language. +</p> + +<p> +As far as we can tell, the barbarians seem to have +possessed a greater facility for acquiring languages than +either Greeks or Romans. Soon after the Macedonian +conquest, we find<note place='foot'>See Niebuhr, Vorlesungen über Alte Geschichte, +b. i. s. 17.</note> <hi rend='italic'>Berosus</hi> in Babylon, +<hi rend='italic'>Menander</hi> in Tyre, and <hi rend='italic'>Manetho</hi> +in Egypt, compiling, from original sources, the annals of their +countries.<note place='foot'>The translation of Mago's work on agriculture belongs to a +later time. There is no proof that Mago, who wrote twenty-eight books on agriculture +in the Punic language, lived, as Humboldt supposes (Cosmos, vol. ii. p. +184), 500 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi> +Varro de R. R. i. 1, says: <q>Hos nobilitate Mago Carthaginiensis +præteriit Pœnica lingua, quod res dispersas comprehendit libris +xxix., quos Cassius Dionysius Uticensis vertit libris xx., Græca lingua, +ac Sextilio prætori misit: in quæ volumina de Græcis libris eorum quos +dixi adjecit non pauca, et de Magonis dempsit instar librorum viii. Hosce +ipsos utiliter ad vi. libros redegit Diophanes in Bithynia, et misit Dejotaro +regi.</q> This Cassius Dionysius Uticencis lived about +40 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi> The translation +into Latin was made at the command of the Senate, shortly after the +third Punic war.</note> Their works +<pb n='095'/><anchor id='Pg095'/> +were written in Greek, and for the Greeks. The native +language of Berosus was Babylonian, of Menander +Phenician, of Manetho Egyptian. Berosus was able +to read the cuneiform documents of Babylonia with +the same ease with which Manetho read the papyri of +Egypt. The almost contemporaneous appearance of +three such men, barbarians by birth and language, who +were anxious to save the histories of their countries +from total oblivion, by entrusting them to the keeping +of their conquerors, the Greeks, is highly significant. +But what is likewise significant, and by no means +creditable to the Greek or Macedonian conquerors, is +the small value which they seem to have set on these +works. They have all been lost, and are known to us +by fragments only, though there can be little doubt +that the work of Berosus would have been an invaluable +guide to the student of the cuneiform inscriptions +and of Babylonian history, and that Manetho, if preserved +complete, would have saved us volumes of controversy +on Egyptian chronology. We learn, however, +from the almost simultaneous appearance of these +works, that soon after the epoch marked by Alexander's +conquests in the East, the Greek language was +studied and cultivated by literary men of barbarian +origin, though we should look in vain for any Greek +<pb n='096'/><anchor id='Pg096'/> +learning or employing any but his own tongue for literary +purposes. We hear of no intellectual intercourse +between Greeks and barbarians before the days of +Alexander and Alexandria. At Alexandria, various +nations, speaking different languages, and believing in +different gods, were brought together. Though primarily +engaged in mercantile speculations, it was but natural +that in their moments of leisure they should hold +discourse on their native countries, their gods, their +kings, their law-givers, and poets. Besides, there were +Greeks at Alexandria who were engaged in the study +of antiquity, and who knew how to ask questions from +men coming from any country of the world. The +pretension of the Egyptians to a fabulous antiquity, the +belief of the Jews in the sacred character of their laws, +the faith of the Persians in the writings of Zoroaster, +all these were fit subjects for discussion in the halls and +libraries of Alexandria. We probably owe the translation +of the Old Testament, the Septuagint, to this +spirit of literary inquiry which was patronized at Alexandria +by the Ptolemies.<note place='foot'>Ptolemæus Philadelphus +(287-246 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi>), on the recommendation of +his chief librarian (Demetrius Philaretes), is said to have sent a Jew of the +name of Aristeas, to Jerusalem, to ask the high priest for a MS. of the +Bible, and for seventy interpreters. Others maintain that the Hellenistic +Jews who lived at Alexandria, and who had almost forgotten their native +language, had this translation made for their own benefit. Certain it is, +that about the beginning of the third century +<hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi> (285), we find the Hebrew +Bible translated into Greek.</note> The writings of Zoroaster +also, the Zend-Avesta, would seem to have been rendered +into Greek about the same time. For Hermippus, +who is said by Pliny to have translated the +writings of Zoroaster, was in all probability +Hermippus,<note place='foot'>Plin. xxx. 2. <q>Sine dubio illa orta in Perside a +Zoroastre, ut inter auctores convenit. Sed unus hic fuerit, an postea et alius, non satis constat. +Eudoxus qui inter sapientiæ sectas clarissimam utilissimamque eam +intelligi voluit, Zoroastrem hunc sex millibus annorum ante Platonis mortem +fuisse prodidit. Sic et Aristoteles. Hermippus qui de tota ea arte +diligentissime scripsit, et vicies centum millia versuum a Zoroastre condita, +indicibus quoque voluminum ejus positis explanavit, præceptorem a quo +institutum disceret, tradidit Azonacem, ipsum vero quinque millibus annorum +ante Trojanum bellum fuisse.</q>—<q>Diogenes Laertius Aristotelem +auctorem facit libri τὸ Μαγικόν. Suidas librum cognovit, dubitat vero a +quo scriptus sit.</q> See Bunsen's Egypten, Va, 101.</note> +the Peripatetic philosopher, the pupil of Callimachus, +<pb n='097'/><anchor id='Pg097'/> +one of the most learned scholars at Alexandria. +</p> + +<p> +But although we find at Alexandria these and similar +traces of a general interest having been excited by +the literatures of other nations, there is no evidence +which would lead us to suppose that their languages +also had become the subject of scientific inquiry. It +was not through the study of other languages, but +through the study of the ancient dialects of their own +language, that the Greeks at Alexandria were first led +to what we should call critical and philological studies. +The critical study of Greek took its origin at Alexandria, +and it was chiefly based on the text of Homer. +The general outline of grammar existed, as I remarked +before, at an earlier period. It grew up in the schools +of Greek philosophers.<note place='foot'>M. M.'s History +of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 163.</note> Plato knew of noun and +verb as the two component parts of speech. Aristotle +added conjunctions and articles. He likewise observed +the distinctions of number and case. But neither Plato +nor Aristotle paid much attention to the forms of language +which corresponded to these forms of thought, +nor had they any inducement to reduce them to any +practical rules. With Aristotle the verb or <emph>rhēmha</emph> is +hardly more than predicate, and in sentences such as +<q>the snow is white,</q> he would have called <emph>white</emph> a +<pb n='098'/><anchor id='Pg098'/> +verb. The first who reduced the actual forms of language +to something like order were the scholars of +Alexandria. Their chief occupation was to publish +correct texts of the Greek classics, and particularly of +Homer. They were forced, therefore, to pay attention +to the exact forms of Greek grammar. The MSS. +sent to Alexandria and Pergamus from different parts +of Greece varied considerably, and it could only be +determined by careful observation which forms were to +be tolerated in Homer and which were not. Their +editions of Homer were not only <emph>ekdoseis</emph>, a Greek +word literally rendered in Latin by <emph>editio</emph>, +<hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> issues +of books, but <emph>diorthōseis</emph>, that is to say, critical editions. +There were different schools, opposed to each other in +their views of the language of Homer. Each reading +that was adopted by Zenodotus or Aristarchus had to +be defended, and this could only be done by establishing +general rules on the grammar of the Homeric +poems. Did Homer use the article? Did he use it +before proper names? These and similar questions +had to be settled, and as one or the other view was +adopted by the editors, the text of these ancient poems +was changed by more or less violent emendations. New +technical terms were required for distinguishing, for instance, +the article, if once recognized, from the demonstrative +pronoun. <emph>Article</emph> is a literal translation of the Greek +word <emph>arthron</emph>. <emph>Arthron</emph> (Lat. artus) means the socket +of a joint. The word was first used by Aristotle, and +with him it could only mean words which formed, as it +were, the sockets in which the members of a sentence +moved. In such a sentence as: <q>Whoever did it, he +shall suffer for it,</q> Greek grammarians would have +called the demonstrative pronoun <emph>he</emph> the first socket, +<pb n='099'/><anchor id='Pg099'/> +and the relative pronoun <emph>who</emph>, the second +socket;<note place='foot'>ἄρθρον προτασσόμενον, ἄρθρον ὑποτασσόμενον.</note> and +before Zenodotus, the first librarian of Alexandria, +250 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi>, all pronouns were simply classed as sockets +or articles of speech. He was the first to introduce a +distinction between personal pronouns or <emph>antonymiai</emph>, +and the mere articles or articulations of speech, which +henceforth retained the name of <emph>arthra</emph>. This distinction +was very necessary, and it was, no doubt, suggested +to him by his emendations of the text of Homer, +Zenodotus being the first who restored the article before +proper names in the Iliad and Odyssey. Who, +in speaking now of the definite or indefinite article, +thinks of the origin and original meaning of the word, +and of the time which it took before it could become +what it is now, a technical term familiar to every +school-boy? +</p> + +<p> +Again, to take another illustration of the influence +which the critical study of Homer at Alexandria exercised +on the development of grammatical terminology,—we +see that the first idea of numbers, of a +singular and a plural, was fixed and defined by the +philosopher. But Aristotle had no such technical +terms as singular and plural; and he does not even allude +to the dual. He only speaks of the cases which +express one or many, though with him <emph>case</emph>, or <emph>ptōsis</emph>, had +a very different meaning from what it has in our grammars. +The terms singular and plural were not invented +till they were wanted, and they were first wanted +by the grammarians. Zenodotus, the editor of Homer, +was the first to observe the use of the dual in the Homeric +poems, and, with the usual zeal of discoverers, +he has altered many a plural into a dual when there +was no necessity for it. +</p> + +<pb n='100'/><anchor id='Pg100'/> + +<p> +The scholars of Alexandria, therefore, and of the +rival academy of Pergamus, were the first who studied +the Greek language critically, that is to say, who analyzed +the language, arranged it under general categories, +distinguished the various parts of speech, invented +proper technical terms for the various functions of +words, observed the more or less correct usage of +certain poets, marked the difference between obsolete +and classical forms, and published long and learned +treatises on all these subjects. Their works mark a +great era in the history of the science of language. +But there was still a step to be made before we can +expect to meet with a real practical or elementary +grammar of the Greek language. Now the first real +Greek grammar was that of <hi rend='italic'>Dionysius Thrax</hi>. It is +still in existence, and though its genuineness has been +doubted, these doubts have been completely disposed of. +</p> + +<p> +But who was Dionysius Thrax? His father, as we +learn from his name, was a Thracian; but Dionysius +himself lived at Alexandria, and was a pupil of the +famous critic and editor of Homer, Aristarchus.<note place='foot'>Suidas, +s. v. Διονύσιος. Διονύσιος Ἀλεξανδρεός, Θρᾷξ δὲ ἀπὸ πατρὸς +τούνομα κληθεὶς, Ἀριστάρχου μαθητὴς, γραμματικὸς ὁς ἐσοφίστευσεν ἐν +Ῥώμη ἐπὶ Πομπηιοῦ τοῦ Μεγάλου.</note> Dionysius +afterwards went to Rome, where he taught +about the time of Pompey. Now here we see a new +feature in the history of mankind. A Greek, a pupil +of Aristarchus, settles at Rome, and writes a practical +grammar of the Greek language—of course, for the +benefit of his young Roman pupils. He was not the +inventor of grammatical science. Nearly all the framework +of grammar, as we saw, was supplied to him +through the labors of his predecessors from Plato to +<pb n='101'/><anchor id='Pg101'/> +Aristarchus. But he was the first who applied the results +of former philosophers and critics to the practical +purpose of teaching Greek; and, what is most important, +of teaching Greek not to Greeks, who knew +Greek and only wanted the theory of their language, +but to Romans who had to be taught the declensions +and conjugations, regular and irregular. His work +thus became one of the principal channels through +which the grammatical terminology, which had been +carried from Athens to Alexandria, flowed back to +Rome, to spread from thence over the whole civilized +world. +</p> + +<p> +Dionysius, however, though the author of the first +practical grammar, was by no means the first <q><emph>professeur +de langue</emph></q> who settled at Rome. At his +time Greek was more generally spoken at Rome than +French is now spoken in London. The children of +gentlemen learnt Greek before they learnt Latin, and +though Quintilian in his work on education does not +approve of a boy learning nothing but Greek for any +length of time, <q>as is now the fashion,</q> he says, <q>with +most people,</q> yet he too recommends that a boy should +be taught Greek first, and Latin +afterwards.<note place='foot'>Quintilian, i. 1, 12.</note> This +may seem strange, but the fact is that as long as we +know anything of Italy, the Greek language was as +much at home there as Latin. Italy owed almost +everything to Greece, not only in later days when the +setting sun of Greek civilization mingled its rays with +the dawn of Roman greatness; but ever since the first +Greek colonists started Westward Ho! in search of +new homes. It was from the Greeks that the Italians +received their alphabet and were taught to read and to +<pb n='102'/><anchor id='Pg102'/> +write.<note place='foot'>See Mommsen, Römische Geschichte, b. i. s. 197. <q>The +Latin alphabet is the same as the modern alphabet of Sicily; the Etruscan is the +same as the old Attic alphabet. <emph>Epistola</emph>, letter, +<emph>charta</emph>, paper, and <emph>stilus</emph>, +are words borrowed from Greek.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Mommsen</hi>, +b. i. s. 184.</note> The names for balance, for measuring-rod, for +engines in general, for coined money,<note place='foot'>Mommsen, +Römische Geschichte, b. i. s. 186. <emph>Statera</emph>, the balance, +the Greek στατήρ; <emph>machina</emph>, an engine, μηχανή; <emph>númus</emph>, a silver +coin, νόμος, the Sicilian νοῦμμος; <emph>groma</emph>, measuring-rod, the Greek γνώμων or +γνῶμα: <emph>clathri</emph>, a trellis, a grate, the Greek κλῆθρα, the native Italian word +for lock being <emph>claustra</emph>.</note> many terms +connected with seafaring,<note place='foot'><emph>Gubernare</emph>, +to steer, from κυβεονᾶν; <emph>anchora</emph>, anchor, from ἀγκῦρα; +<emph>prora</emph>, the forepart, from πρῶρα. <emph>Navis</emph>, +<emph>remus</emph>, <emph>velum</emph>, &c., are common +Aryan words, not borrowed by the Romans from the Greeks, and show +that the Italians were acquainted with navigation before the discovery of +Italy by the Phocæans.</note> not excepting <emph>nausea</emph> or +sea-sickness, are all borrowed from Greek, and show +the extent to which the Italians were indebted to the +Greeks for the very rudiments of civilization. The +Italians, no doubt, had their own national gods, but +they soon became converts to the mythology of the +Greeks. Some of the Greek gods they identified with +their own; others they admitted as new deities. Thus +<emph>Saturnus</emph>, originally an Italian harvest god, was identified +with the Greek <emph>Kronos</emph>, and as <emph>Kronos</emph> was the +son of <emph>Uranos</emph>, a new deity was invented, and <emph>Saturnus</emph> +was fabled to be the son of <emph>Cœlus</emph>. Thus the Italian +<emph>Herculus</emph>, the god of hurdles, enclosures, and walls, was +merged in the Greek <emph>Heracles</emph>.<note place='foot'>Mommsen, +i. 154.</note> <emph>Castor</emph> and <emph>Pollux</emph>, +both of purely Greek origin, were readily believed in +as nautical deities by the Italian sailors, and they were +the first Greek gods to whom, after the battle on the +Lake Regillus (485), a temple was erected at Rome.<note place='foot'>Ibid. i. 408.</note> +In 431 another temple was erected at Rome to Apollo, +whose oracle at Delphi had been consulted by Italians +<pb n='103'/><anchor id='Pg103'/> +ever since Greek colonists had settled on their soil. +The oracles of the famous Sibylla of Cumæ were +written in Greek,<note place='foot'>Mommsen, i. 165.</note> +and the priests (duoviri sacris +faciundis) were allowed to keep two Greek slaves +for the purpose of translating these oracles.<note place='foot'><emph>Sibylla</emph>, +or <emph>sibulla</emph>, is a diminutive of an Italian <emph>sabus</emph> or +<emph>sabius</emph>, wise; a +word which, though not found in classical writers, must have existed in the +Italian dialects. The French <emph>sage</emph> presupposes an +Italian <emph>sabius</emph>, for it cannot +be derived either from <emph>sapiens</emph> or from +<emph>sapius</emph>.—<hi rend='italic'>Diez, Lexicon Etymologicum</hi>, +p. 300. <emph>Sapius</emph> has been preserved in +<emph>nesapius</emph>, foolish. <emph>Sibulla</emph> +therefore meant a wise old woman.</note> +</p> + +<p> +When the Romans, in 454 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi>, wanted to establish +a code of laws, the first thing they did was to send +commissioners to Greece to report on the laws of +Solon at Athens and the laws of other Greek +towns.<note place='foot'>Mommsen, i. 256.</note> +As Rome rose in political power, Greek manners, +Greek art, Greek language and literature found ready +admittance.<note place='foot'>Ibid. i. 425, 444.</note> +Before the beginning of the Punic wars, +many of the Roman statesmen were able to understand, +and even to speak Greek. Boys were not +only taught the Roman letters by their masters, the +<emph>literatores</emph>, but they had to learn at the same time +the Greek alphabet. Those who taught Greek at +Rome were then called <emph>grammatici</emph>, and they were +mostly Greek slaves or <emph>liberti</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +Among the young men whom Cato saw growing +up at Rome, to know Greek was the same as to be a +gentleman. They read Greek books, they conversed +in Greek, they even wrote in Greek. Tiberius Gracchus, +consul in 177, made a speech in Greek at +Rhodes, which he afterwards published.<note place='foot'>Ibid. i. 857.</note> Flaminius, +when addressed by the Greeks in Latin, returned the +compliment by writing Greek verses in honor of their +<pb n='104'/><anchor id='Pg104'/> +gods. The first history of Rome was written at Rome +in Greek, by Fabius Pictor,<note place='foot'>Mommsen, +i. 902.</note> about 200 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi>; and it +was probably in opposition to this work, and to those +of Lucius Cincius Alimentus, and Publius Scipio, that +Cato wrote his own history of Rome in Latin. The +example of the higher classes was eagerly followed by +the lowest. The plays of Plautus are the best proof; +for the affectation of using Greek words is as evident +in some of his characters as the foolish display of +French in the German writers of the eighteenth century. +There was both loss and gain in the inheritance +which Rome received from Greece; but what would +Rome have been without her Greek masters? The +very fathers of Roman literature were Greeks, private +teachers, men who made a living by translating +school-books and plays. Livius Andronicus, sent as +prisoner of war from Tarentum (272 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi>), established +himself at Rome as professor of Greek. His +translation of the Odyssey into Latin verse, which +marks the beginning of Roman literature, was evidently +written by him for the use of his private +classes. His style, though clumsy and wooden in the +extreme, was looked upon as a model of perfection by +the rising poets of the capital. Nævius and Plautus +were his cotemporaries and immediate successors. +All the plays of Plautus were translations and adaptations +of Greek originals; and Plautus was not even +allowed to transfer the scene from Greece to Rome. +The Roman public wanted to see Greek life and +Greek depravity; it would have stoned the poet who +had ventured to bring on the stage a Roman patrician +or a Roman matron. Greek tragedies, also, were +<pb n='105'/><anchor id='Pg105'/> +translated into Latin. Ennius, the cotemporary of +Nævius and Plautus, though somewhat younger (239-169), +was the first to translate Euripides. Ennius, +like Andronicus, was an Italian Greek, who settled +at Rome as a teacher of languages and translator of +Greek. He was patronized by the liberal party, by +Publius Scipio, Titus Flaminius, and Marcus Fulvius +Nobilior.<note place='foot'>Mommsen, i. 892.</note> He became a Roman citizen. But Ennius +was more than a poet, more than a teacher of languages. +He has been called a neologian, and to a +certain extent he deserved that name. Two works +written in the most hostile spirit against the religion +of Greece, and against the very existence of the Greek +gods, were translated by him into Latin.<note place='foot'>Ibid. +i. 843, 194.</note> One was the philosophy of +<hi rend='italic'>Epicharmus</hi> (470 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi>, in Megara), +who taught that Zeus was nothing but the air, and +other gods but names of the powers of nature; the +other the work of <hi rend='italic'>Euhemerus</hi>, +of Messene (300 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi>), +who proved, in the form of a novel, that the Greek +gods had never existed, and that those who were believed +in as gods had been men. These two works +were not translated without a purpose; and though +themselves shallow in the extreme, they proved destructive +to the still shallower systems of Roman +theology. Greek became synonymous with infidel; +and Ennius would hardly have escaped the punishment +inflicted on Nævius for his political satires, had +he not enjoyed the patronage and esteem of the most +influential statesmen at Rome. Even Cato, the stubborn +enemy of Greek philosophy<note place='foot'>Ibid. i. 911.</note> and rhetoric, was a +friend of the dangerous Ennius; and such was the +growing influence of Greek at Rome, that Cato himself +<pb n='106'/><anchor id='Pg106'/> +had to learn it in his old age, in order to teach his +boy what he considered, if not useful, at least harmless +in Greek literature. It has been the custom to laugh +at Cato for his dogged opposition to everything Greek; +but there was much truth in his denunciations. We +have heard much of young Bengál—young Hindus +who read Byron and Voltaire, play at billiards, drive +tandems, laugh at their priests, patronize missionaries, +and believe nothing. The description which Cato +gives of the young idlers at Rome reminds us very +much of young Bengál. +</p> + +<p> +When Rome took the torch of knowledge from the +dying hands of Greece, that torch was not burning +with its brightest light. Plato and Aristotle had been +succeeded by Chrysippus and Carneades; Euripides +and Menander had taken the place of Æschylus and +Sophocles. In becoming the guardian of the Promethean +spark first lighted in Greece, and intended hereafter +to illuminate not only Italy, but every country +of Europe, Rome lost much of that native virtue to +which she owed her greatness. Roman frugality and +gravity, Roman citizenship and patriotism, Roman +purity and piety, were driven away by Greek luxury +and levity, Greek intriguing and self-seeking, Greek +vice and infidelity. Restrictions and anathemas were +of no avail; and Greek ideas were never so attractive +as when they had been reprobated by Cato and his +friends. Every new generation became more and more +impregnated with Greek. In 131<note place='foot'>Mommsen, ii. 407.</note> we hear of a +consul (Publius Crassus) who, like another Mezzofanti, was +able to converse in the various dialects of Greek. +Sulla allowed foreign ambassadors to speak Greek +<pb n='107'/><anchor id='Pg107'/> +before the Roman senate.<note place='foot'>Mommsen, ii. 410.</note> The Stoic philosopher +Panætius<note place='foot'>Ibid. ii. 408.</note> lived in the house of the Scipios, which +was for a long time the rendezvous of all the literary +celebrities at Rome. Here the Greek historian Polybius, +and the philosopher Cleitomachus, Lucilius the +satirist, Terence the African poet (196-159), and the +improvisatore Archias (102 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi>), were welcome +guests.<note place='foot'>Ibid. ii. 437, <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>; +ii. 430.</note> In this select circle the master-works of Greek +literature were read and criticised; the problems of +Greek philosophy were discussed; and the highest interests +of human life became the subject of thoughtful +conversation. Though no poet of original genius +arose from this society, it exercised a most powerful +influence on the progress of Roman literature. It +formed a tribunal of good taste; and much of the +correctness, simplicity, and manliness of the classical +Latin is due to that <q>Cosmopolitan Club,</q> which +met under the hospitable roof of the Scipios. +</p> + +<p> +The religious life of Roman society at the close of +the Punic wars was more Greek than Roman. All +who had learnt to think seriously on religious questions +were either Stoics or followers of Epicurus; or +they embraced the doctrines of the New Academy, +denying the possibility of any knowledge of the Infinite, +and putting opinion in the place of +truth.<note place='foot'>Zeno died 263; Epicurus died 270; Arcesilaus died 241; Carneades +died 129.</note> +Though the doctrines of Epicurus and the New Academy +were always considered dangerous and heretical, +the philosophy of the Stoics was tolerated, and a kind +of compromise effected between philosophy and religion. +There was a state-philosophy as well as a state-religion. +<pb n='108'/><anchor id='Pg108'/> +The Roman priesthood, though they had +succeeded, in 161, in getting all Greek rhetors and +philosophers expelled from Rome, perceived that a +compromise was necessary. It was openly avowed +that in the enlightened classes<note place='foot'>Mommsen, +ii. 417, 418.</note> philosophy must take +the place of religion, but that a belief in miracles and +oracles was necessary for keeping the large masses +in order. Even Cato,<note place='foot'>Ibid. i. 845.</note> the leader of the orthodox, +national, and conservative party, expressed his surprise +that a haruspex, when meeting a colleague, did not +burst out laughing. Men like Scipio Æmilianus and +Lælius professed to believe in the popular gods; but +with them Jupiter was the soul of the universe, the +statues of the gods mere works of art.<note place='foot'>Ibid. ii. 415, 417.</note> Their +gods, as the people complained, had neither body, parts, +nor passions. Peace, however, was preserved between +the Stoic philosopher and the orthodox priest. Both +parties professed to believe in the same gods, but they +claimed the liberty to believe in them in their own +way. +</p> + +<p> +I have dwelt at some length on the changes in the +intellectual atmosphere of Rome at the end of the +Punic wars, and I have endeavored to show how +completely it was impregnated with Greek ideas in +order to explain, what otherwise would seem almost +inexplicable, the zeal and earnestness with which the +study of Greek grammar was taken up at Rome, not +only by a few scholars and philosophers, but by the +leading statesmen of the time. To our minds, discussions +on nouns and verbs, on cases and gender, on +regular and irregular conjugation, retain always something +of the tedious character which these subjects +<pb n='109'/><anchor id='Pg109'/> +had at school, and we can hardly understand how at +Rome, grammar—pure and simple grammar—should +have formed a subject of general interest, and a topic of +fashionable conversation. When one of the first grammarians +of the day, Crates of Pergamus, was sent to +Rome as ambassador of King Attalus, he was received +with the greatest distinction by all the literary statesmen +of the capital. It so happened that when walking +one day on the Palatian hill, Crates caught his foot in +the grating of a sewer, fell and broke his leg. Being +thereby detained at Rome longer than he intended, he +was persuaded to give some public lectures, or <emph>akroaseis</emph>, +on grammar; and from these lectures, says Suetonius, +dates the study of grammar at Rome. This took place +about 159 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi>, between the second and third Punic +wars, shortly after the death of Ennius, and two years +after the famous expulsion of the Greek rhetors and +philosophers (161). Four years later Carneades, likewise +sent to Rome as ambassador, was prohibited from +lecturing by Cato. After these lectures of Crates, +grammatical and philological studies became extremely +popular at Rome. We hear of Lucius Ælius Stilo,<note place='foot'>Mommsen, +ii. 413, 426, 445, 457. Lucius Ælius Stilo wrote a work on +etymology, and an index to Plautus.—<hi rend='italic'>Lersch</hi>, +<hi rend='italic'>Die Sprachphilosophie der +Alten</hi>, ii. 111.</note> +who lectured on Latin as Crates had lectured on Greek. +Among his pupils were Varro, Lucilius, and Cicero. +Varro composed twenty-four books on the Latin language, +four of which were dedicated to Cicero. Cicero, +himself, is quoted as an authority on grammatical questions, +though we know of no special work of his on +grammar. Lucilius devoted the ninth book of his +satires to the reform of spelling.<note place='foot'>Lersch, +ii. 113, 114, 143.</note> But nothing shows +<pb n='110'/><anchor id='Pg110'/> +more clearly the wide interest which grammatical studies +had then excited in the foremost ranks of Roman +society than Cæsar's work on Latin grammar. It was +composed by him during the Gallic war, and dedicated +to Cicero, who might well be proud of the compliment +thus paid him by the great general and statesman. +Most of these works are lost to us, and we can judge +of them only by means of casual quotations. Thus we +learn from a fragment of Cæsar's work, <hi rend='italic'>De analogia</hi>, +that he was the inventor of the term <emph>ablative</emph> in Latin. +The word never occurs before, and, of course, could +not be borrowed, like the names of the other cases, +from Greek grammarians, as they admitted no ablative +in Greek. To think of Cæsar fighting the barbarians +of Gaul and Germany, and watching from a distance +the political complications at Rome, ready to grasp the +sceptre of the world, and at the same time carrying on +his philological and grammatical studies together with +his secretary, the Greek Didymus,<note place='foot'>Lersch, iii. 144.</note> gives us a +new view both of that extraordinary man, and of the time in +which he lived. After Cæsar had triumphed, one of +his favorite plans was to found a Greek and Latin library +at Rome, and he offered the librarianship to the +best scholar of the day, to Varro, though Varro had +fought against him on the side of Pompey.<note place='foot'>Mommsen, +iii. 557. 48 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi></note> +</p> + +<p> +We have thus arrived at the time when, as we saw +in an earlier part of this lecture, Dionysius Thrax published +the first elementary grammar of Greek at Rome. +Empirical grammar had thus been transplanted to Rome, +the Greek grammatical terminology was translated into +Latin, and in this new Latin garb it has travelled now for +nearly two thousand years over the whole civilized world. +<pb n='111'/><anchor id='Pg111'/> +Even in India, where a different terminology had grown +up in the grammatical schools of the Brahmans, a terminology +in some respects more perfect than that of +Alexandria and Rome, we may now hear such words +as <emph>case</emph>, and <emph>gender</emph>, +and <emph>active</emph> and <emph>passive</emph>, explained by +European teachers to their native pupils. The fates of +words are curious indeed, and when I looked the other +day at some of the examination papers of the government +schools in India, such questions as—<q>Write the +genitive case of Siva,</q> seemed to reduce whole volumes +of history into a single sentence. How did these words, +genitive case, come to India? They came from England, +they had come to England from Rome, to Rome +from Alexandria, to Alexandria from Athens. At +Athens, the term <emph>case</emph>, or <emph>ptōsis</emph>, had a philosophical +meaning; at Rome, <emph>casus</emph> was merely a literal translation; +the original meaning of <emph>fall</emph> was lost, and the +word dwindled down to a mere technical term. At +Athens, the philosophy of language was a counterpart +of the philosophy of the mind. The terminology of +formal logic and formal grammar was the same. The +logic of the Stoics was divided into two +parts,<note place='foot'>Lersch, ii. 25. Περὶ σημαινόντων, or περὶ φώνης; and +περὶ σημαινομένον, +or περὶ πραγμάτων.</note> called +<emph>rhetoric</emph> and <emph>dialectic</emph>, and the latter treated, first, <q>On +that which signifies, or language;</q> secondly, <q>On that +which is signified, or things.</q> In their philosophical +language <emph>ptōsis</emph>, which the Romans translated by <emph>casus</emph>, +really meant fall; that is to say, the inclination or relation +of one idea to another, the falling or resting of +one word on another. Long and angry discussions were +carried on as to whether the name of <emph>ptōsis</emph>, or fall, was +applicable to the nominative; and every true Stoic +<pb n='112'/><anchor id='Pg112'/> +would have scouted the expression of <emph>casus rectus</emph>, because +the subject or the nominative, as they argued, did +not fall or rest on anything else, but stood erect, the +other words of a sentence leaning or depending on it. +All this is lost to us when we speak of cases. +</p> + +<p> +And how are the dark scholars in the government +schools of India to guess the meaning of <emph>genitive</emph>? The +Latin <emph>genitivus</emph> is a mere blunder, for the Greek word +<emph>genikē</emph> could never mean <emph>genitivus</emph>. <emph>Genitivus</emph>, if +it is meant to express the case of origin or birth, would in +Greek have been called <emph>gennētikē</emph>, not <emph>genikē</emph>. Nor does +the genitive express the relation of son to father. For +though we may say, <q>the son of the father,</q> we may +likewise say, <q>the father of the son.</q> <emph>Genikē</emph>, in Greek, +had a much wider, a much more philosophical meaning.<note place='foot'>Beiträge +zur Geschichte der Grammatik, von Dr. K. E. A. Schmidt. +Halle, 1859. Uber den Begriff der γενικὴ πτῶσις, s. 320.</note> +It meant <emph>casus generalis</emph>, the general case, or +rather the case which expresses the gentus or kind. +This is the real power of the genitive. If I say, <q>a +bird of the water,</q> <q>of the water</q> defines the genus +to which a certain bird belongs; it refers it to the genus +of water-birds. <q>Man of the mountains,</q> means a +mountaineer. In phrases such as <q>son of the father,</q> +or <q>father of the son,</q> the genitives have the same +effect. They predicate something of the son or of the +father; and if we distinguished between the sons of +the father, and the sons of the mother, the genitives +would mark the class or genus to which the sons respectively +belonged. They would answer the same purpose +as the adjectives, paternal and maternal. It can +be proved etymologically that the termination of the +genitive is, in most cases, identical with those derivative +<pb n='113'/><anchor id='Pg113'/> +suffixes by which substantives are changed into adjectives.<note place='foot'>In +the Tibetan languages the rule is, <q>Adjectives are formed from substantives +by the addition of the genitive sign,</q> which might be inverted +into, <q>The genitive is formed from the nominative by the addition of the +adjective sign.</q> For instance, <emph>shing</emph>, +wood; <emph>shing gi</emph>, of wood, or wooden: +<emph>ser</emph>, gold; <emph>ser-gyi</emph>, of gold, +or golden: <emph>mi</emph>, man; <emph>mi-yi</emph>, of man, or human. +The same in Garo, where the sign of the genitive +is <emph>ni</emph>, we have; <emph>mánde-ní +jak</emph>, the hand of man, or the human hand; <emph>ambal-ní ketháli</emph>, a wooden +knife, or a knife of wood. In Hindustání the genitive is so clearly an adjective, +that it actually takes the marks of gender according to the words to which +it refers. But how is it in Sanskrit and Greek? In Sanskrit we may form +adjectives by the addition of <emph>tya</emph>. +(Turanian Languages, p. 41, <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>; Essay +on Bengálí, p. 333.) For instance, <emph>dakshiņâ</emph>, +south; <emph>dakshiņâ-tya</emph>, southern. +This <emph>tya</emph> is clearly a demonstrative pronoun, +the same as the Sanskrit <emph>syas</emph>, +<emph>syâ</emph>, <emph>tyad</emph>, this or that. +<emph>Tya</emph> is a pronominal base, and therefore such adjectives +as <emph>dakshiņâ-tya</emph>, southern, or +<emph>âp-tya</emph>, aquatic, from <emph>âp</emph>, water, must have +been conceived originally as <q>water-there,</q> or <q>south-there.</q> Followed +by the terminations of the nominative singular, which was again an original +pronoun, <emph>âptyas</emph> would mean <emph>âp-tya-s</emph>, +<hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>, water-there-he. Now, it +makes little difference whether I say an aquatic bird or a bird of the water. +In Sanskrit the genitive of water would be, if we +take <emph>udaka</emph>, <emph>udaka-sya</emph>. +This <emph>sya</emph> is the same pronominal base as +the adjective termination <emph>tya</emph>, only +that the former takes no sign for the gender, like the adjective. The genitive +<emph>udakasya</emph> is therefore the same as an adjective without gender. Now +let us look to Greek. We there form adjectives by σιος, which is the same +as the Sanskrit <emph>tya</emph> or <emph>sya</emph>. For instance, from +δῆμος, people, the Greeks +formed δημόσιος, belonging to the people. Here ος, α, ον, mark the gender. +Leave the gender out, and you get δημοσιο. Now, there is a rule in Greek +that an ς between two vowels, in grammatical terminations, is elided. Thus +the genitive of γένος is not γένεσος, but γένεος, or γένους; +hence δημόσιο +would necessarily become δήμοιο. And what is δήμοιο but the regular +Homeric genitive of δῆμος, which in later Greek was replaced by δήμου? +Thus we see that the same principles which governed the formation of adjectives +and genitives in Tibetan, in Garo, and Hindustání, were at work +in the primitive stages of Sanskrit and Greek; and we perceive how accurately +the real power of the genitive was determined by the ancient Greek +grammarians, who called it the general or predicative case, whereas the +Romans spoiled the term by wrongly translating it into <emph>genitivus</emph>.</note> +</p> + +<p> +It is hardly necessary to trace the history of what I +call the empirical study, or the grammatical analysis of +language, beyond Rome. With Dionysius Thrax the +<pb n='114'/><anchor id='Pg114'/> +framework of grammar was finished. Later writers +have improved and completed it, but they have added +nothing really new and original. We can follow the +stream of grammatical science from Dionysius Thrax to +our own time in an almost uninterrupted chain of +Greek and Roman writers. We find Quintilian in the +first century; Scaurus, Apollonius Dyscolus, and his son, +Herodianus, in the second; Probus and Donatus in the +fourth. After Constantine had moved the seat of government +from Rome, grammatical science received a new +home in the academy of Constantinople. There were no +less than twenty Greek and Latin grammarians who +held professorships at Constantinople. Under Justinian, +in the sixth century, the name of Priscianus gave +a new lustre to grammatical studies, and his work remained +an authority during the Middle Ages to nearly +our own times. We ourselves have been taught grammar +according to the plan which was followed by +Dionysius at Rome, by Priscianus at Constantinople, +by Alcuin at York; and whatever may be said of the +improvements introduced into our system of education, +the Greek and Latin grammars used at our public +schools are mainly founded on the first empirical analysis +of language, prepared by the philosophers of Athens, +applied by the scholars of Alexandria, and transferred +to the practical purpose of teaching a foreign tongue by +the Greek professors at Rome. +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='115'/><anchor id='Pg115'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Lecture IV. The Classificatory Stage.</head> + +<p> +We traced, in our last lecture, the origin and progress +of the empirical study of languages from the time +of Plato and Aristotle to our own school-boy days. +We saw at what time, and under what circumstances, +the first grammatical analysis of language took place; +how its component parts, the parts of speech, were +named, and how, with the aid of a terminology, half +philosophical and half empirical, a system of teaching +languages was established, which, whatever we may +think of its intrinsic value, has certainly answered that +purpose for which it was chiefly intended. +</p> + +<p> +Considering the process by which this system of +grammatical science was elaborated, it could not be +expected to give us an insight into the nature of language. +The division into nouns and verbs, articles +and conjunctions, the schemes of declension and conjugation, +were a merely artificial network thrown over +the living body of language. We must not look in the +grammar of Dionysius Thrax for a correct and well-articulated +skeleton of human speech. It is curious, +however, to observe the striking coincidences between +the grammatical terminology of the Greeks and the +Hindús, which would seem to prove that there must +be some true and natural foundation for the much-abused +<pb n='116'/><anchor id='Pg116'/> +grammatical system of the schools. The Hindús +are the only nation that cultivated the science of +grammar without having received any impulse, directly +or indirectly, from the Greeks. Yet we find in Sanskrit +too the same system of cases, called <hi rend='italic'>vibhakti</hi>, or +inflections, the active, passive, and middle voices, the +tenses, moods, and persons, divided not exactly, but +very nearly, in the same manner as in Greek.<note place='foot'>See +M. M.'s History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 158.</note> In +Sanskrit, grammar is called <hi rend='italic'>vyâkaraņa</hi>, which means +analysis or taking to pieces. As Greek grammar owed +its origin to the critical study of Homer, Sanskrit +grammar arose from the study of the Vedas, the most +ancient poetry of the Brahmans. The differences between +the dialect of these sacred hymns and the literary +Sanskrit of later ages were noted and preserved +with a religious care. We still possess the first essays +in the grammatical science of the Brahmans, the so-called +<hi rend='italic'>prâtiśâkhyas</hi>. These works, though they merely +profess to give rules on the proper pronunciation of the +ancient dialect of the Vedas, furnish us at the same +time with observations of a grammatical character, and +particularly with those valuable lists of words, irregular +or in any other way remarkable, the Gaņas. These +supplied that solid basis on which successive generations +of scholars erected the astounding structure +that reached its perfection in the grammar of Pâņini. +There is no form, regular or irregular, in the whole +Sanskrit language, which is not provided for in the +grammar of Pâņini and his commentators. It is the +perfection of a merely empirical analysis of language, +unsurpassed, nay even unapproached, by anything in +the grammatical literature of other nations. Yet of +<pb n='117'/><anchor id='Pg117'/> +the real nature, and natural growth of language, it +teaches us nothing. +</p> + +<p> +What then do we know of language after we have +learnt the grammar of Greek or Sanskrit, or after we +have transferred the network of classical grammar to +our own tongue? +</p> + +<p> +We know certain forms of language which correspond +to certain forms of thought. We know that +the subject must assume the form of the nominative, +the object that of the accusative. We know that the +more remote object may be put in the dative, and that +the predicate, in its most general form, may be rendered +by the genitive. We are taught that whereas in English +the genitive is marked by a final <emph>s</emph>, or by the preposition +<emph>of</emph>, it is in Greek expressed by a final ος, in +Latin by <emph>is</emph>. But what this ος and <emph>is</emph> represent, why +they should have the power of changing a nominative +into a genitive, a subject into a predicate, remains a +riddle. It is self-evident that each language, in order +to be a language, must be able to distinguish the subject +from the object, the nominative from the accusative. +But how a mere change of termination should +suffice to convey so material a distinction would seem +almost incomprehensible. If we look for a moment +beyond Greek and Latin, we see that there are in +reality but few languages which have distinct forms +for these two categories of thought. Even in Greek +and Latin there is no outward distinction between the +nominative and accusative of neuters. The Chinese +language, it is commonly said, has no grammar at all, +that is to say, it has no inflections, no declension and +conjugation, in our sense of these words; it makes no +formal distinction of the various parts of speech, noun, +<pb n='118'/><anchor id='Pg118'/> +verb, adjective, adverb, &c. Yet there is no shade of +thought that cannot be rendered in Chinese. The +Chinese have no more difficulty in distinguishing between +<q>James beats John,</q> and <q>John beats James,</q> +than the Greeks and Romans or we ourselves. They +have no termination for the accusative, but they attain +the same by always placing the subject before, and the +object after the verb, or by employing words, before or +after the noun, which clearly indicate that it is to be +taken as the object of the verb.<note place='foot'><p> +The following and some other notes were kindly sent to me by the +first Chinese scholar in Europe, M. Stanislas Julien, Membre de l'Institut. +</p> +<p> +The Chinese do not decline their substantives, but they indicate the cases +distinctly— +</p> +<p> +A. By means of particles.<lb/> +B. By means of position.<lb/> +</p> +<p> +1. The nominative or the subject of a sentence is always placed at the +beginning. +</p> +<p> +2. The genitive may be marked— +</p> +<p> +(<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>) By the particle <emph>tchi</emph> +placed between the two nouns, of which the first +is in the genitive, the second in the nominative. Example, <emph>jin tchi kiun</emph> +(hominum princeps, literally, man, sign of the genitive, prince.) +</p> +<p> +(<hi rend='italic'>b</hi>) By position, placing the word which is in the genitive first, +and the word which is in the nominative second. Ex. <emph>koue</emph> (kingdom) +<emph>jin</emph> (man) <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>, a man of the kingdom. +</p> +<p> +3. The dative may be expressed— +</p> +<p> +(<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>) By the preposition <emph>yu</emph>, to. Ex. +<emph>sse</emph> (to give) <emph>yen</emph> (money) <emph>yu</emph> (to) <emph>jin</emph> +(man). +</p> +<p> +(<hi rend='italic'>b</hi>) By position, placing first the verb, then the word which +stands in the dative, lastly, the word which stands in the accusative. Ex. +<emph>yu</emph> (to give) <emph>jin</emph> (to a man) <emph>pe</emph> (white) +<emph>yu</emph> (jade), <emph>hoang</emph> (yellow) <emph>kin</emph> (metal), +<hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>, gold. +</p> +<p> +4. The accusative is either left without any mark, for instance, <emph>pao</emph> (to +protect) <emph>min</emph> (the people), or it is preceded by certain words which had +originally a more tangible meaning, but gradually dwindled away into +mere signs of the accusative. [These were first discovered and correctly +explained by M. Stanislas Julien in his Vindiciæ Philologicæ in Linguam +Sinicam, Paris, 1830.] The particles most frequently used for this purpose +by modern writers are <emph>pa</emph> and <emph>tsiang</emph>, to grasp, to take. Ex. +<emph>pa</emph> (taking) <emph>tchoung-jin</emph> (crowd of men) <emph>t'eou</emph> +(secretly) <emph>k'an</emph> (he looked) <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>, he looked +secretly at the crowd of men (hominum turbam furtim aspiciebat). In the +more ancient Chinese (<emph>Kouwen</emph>) the words used for the same purpose are +<emph>i</emph> (to employ, etc.), <emph>iu</emph>, <emph>iu</emph>, <emph>hou</emph>. +Ex. <emph>i</emph> (employing) <emph>jin</emph> (mankind) <emph>t'sun</emph> (he +preserves) <emph>sin</emph> (in the heart), <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>, humanitatem +conservat corde. <emph>I</emph> (taking) <emph>tchi</emph> (right) <emph>wêï</emph> +(to make) <emph>k'iŏ</emph> (crooked), <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>, rectum facere curvum. +<emph>Pao</emph> (to protect) <emph>hou</emph> (sign of accus.) <emph>min</emph> +(the people). +</p> +<p> +5. The ablative is expressed— +</p> +<p> +(<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>) By means of prepositions, such as <emph>thsong</emph>, +<emph>yeou</emph>, <emph>tsen</emph>, <emph>hou</emph>. Ex. <emph>thsong</emph> +(ex) <emph>thien</emph> (cœlo) <emph>laï</emph> (venire); <emph>te</emph> (obtinere) +<emph>hou</emph> (ab) <emph>thien</emph> (cœlo). +</p> +<p> +(<hi rend='italic'>b</hi>) By means of position, so that the word in the ablative is +placed before the verb. Ex. <emph>thien</emph> (heaven) <emph>hiang-tchi</emph> +(descended, <emph>tchi</emph> being the relative particle or sign of the genitive) +<emph>tsaï</emph> (calamities), <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>, the calamities +which Heaven sends to men. +</p> +<p> +6. The instrumental is expressed— +</p> +<p> +(<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>) By the preposition <emph>yu</emph>, with. Ex. +<emph>yu</emph> (with) <emph>kien</emph> (the sword) <emph>cha</emph> (to +kill) <emph>jin</emph> (a man). +</p> +<p> +(<hi rend='italic'>b</hi>) By position, the substantive which stands in the instrumental +case being placed before the verb, which is followed again by the noun in the +accusative. Ex. <emph>i</emph> (by hanging) <emph>cha</emph> (he killed) +<emph>tchi</emph> (him). +</p> +<p> +7. The locative may be expressed by simply placing the noun before +the verb. Ex. <emph>si</emph> (in the East or East) <emph>yeou</emph> +(there is) <emph>suo-tou-po</emph> (a sthúpa); +or by prepositions as described in the text. +</p> +<p> +The adjective is always placed before the substantive to which it belongs. +Ex. <emph>meï jin</emph>, a beautiful woman. +</p> +<p> +The adverb is generally followed by a particle which produces the same +effect as <emph>e</emph> in bene, or <emph>ter</emph> in celeriter. +Ex. <emph>cho-jen</emph>, in silence, silently; +<emph>ngeou-jen</emph>, perchance; <emph>kiu-jen</emph>, with fear. +</p> +<p> +Sometimes an adjective becomes an adverb through position. Ex. <emph>chen</emph>, +good; but <emph>chen ko</emph>, to sing well. +</p></note> There are other languages +<pb n='119'/><anchor id='Pg119'/> +which have more terminations even than Greek +and Latin. In Finnish there are fifteen cases, expressive +of every possible relation between the subject and +the object; but there is no accusative, no purely objective +case. In English and French the distinctive +terminations of the nominative and accusative have +been worn off by phonetic corruption, and these languages +are obliged, like Chinese, to mark the subject +and object by the collocation of words. What we +learn therefore at school in being taught that <emph>rex</emph> in the +nominative becomes <emph>regem</emph> in the accusative, is simply +a practical rule. We know when to say <emph>rex</emph>, and when +to say <emph>regem</emph>. But why the king as a subject should +be called <emph>rex</emph>, and as an object <emph>regem</emph>, remains entirely +<pb n='120'/><anchor id='Pg120'/> +unexplained. In the same manner we learn that <emph>amo</emph> +means I love, <emph>amavi</emph> I loved; but why that tragical +change from <emph>love</emph> to <emph>no love</emph> should be represented by +the simple change of <emph>o</emph> to <emph>avi</emph>, or, in English, by the +addition of a mere <emph>d</emph>, is neither asked nor answered. +</p> + +<p> +Now if there is a science of language, these are the +questions which it will have to answer. If they cannot +be answered, if we must be content with paradigms +and rules, if the terminations of nouns and verbs must +be looked upon either as conventional contrivances or +as mysterious excrescences, there is no such thing as a +science of language, and we must be satisfied with +what has been called the art (τέχνη) of language, or +grammar. +</p> + +<p> +Before we either accept or decline the solution of +any problem, it is right to determine what means there +are for solving it. Beginning with English we should +ask, what means have we for finding out why <emph>I love</emph> +should mean I am actually loving, whereas <emph>I loved</emph> indicates +that that feeling is past and gone? Or, if we +look to languages richer in inflections than English, +by what process can we discover under what circumstances +<emph>amo</emph>, I love, was changed, through the mere addition +of an <emph>r</emph>, into <emph>amor</emph>, expressing no longer <emph>I love</emph>, +but <emph>I am loved</emph>? Did declensions and conjugations bud +forth like the blossoms of a tree? Were they imparted +to man ready made by some mysterious power? Or +did some wise people invent them, assigning certain +letters to certain phases of thought, as mathematicians +express unknown quantities by freely chosen algebraic +exponents? We are here brought at once face to face +with the highest and most difficult problem of our +science, the origin of language. But it will be well +<pb n='121'/><anchor id='Pg121'/> +for the present to turn our eyes away from theories, +and fix our attention at first entirely on facts. +</p> + +<p> +Let us keep to the English perfect, <emph>I loved</emph>, as compared +with the present, <emph>I love</emph>. We cannot embrace at +once the whole English grammar, but if we can track +one form to its true lair, we shall probably have no +difficulty in digging out the rest of the brood. Now, +if we ask how the addition of a final <emph>d</emph> could express +the momentous transition from being in love to being +indifferent, the first thing we have to do, before attempting +any explanation, would be to establish the +earliest and most original form of <emph>I loved</emph>. This is a +rule which even Plato recognized in his philosophy of +language, though, we must confess, he seldom obeyed +it. We know what havoc phonetic corruption may +make both in the dictionary and the grammar of a +language, and it would be a pity to waste our conjectures +on formations which a mere reference to the history +of language would suffice to explain. Now a very +slight acquaintance with the history of the English +language teaches us that the grammar of modern English +is not the same as the grammar of Wycliffe. +Wycliffe's English again may be traced back to what, +with Sir Frederick Madden, we may call Middle +English, from 1500 to 1330; Middle English to Early +English, from 1330 to 1230; Early English to Semi-Saxon +from 1230 to 1100; and Semi-Saxon to Anglo-Saxon.<note place='foot'>See +some criticisms on this division in Marsh's Lectures on the +English Language, p. 48.</note> +It is evident that if we are to discover the +original intention of the syllable which changes <emph>I love</emph> +into <emph>I loved</emph>, we must consult the original form of that +syllable wherever we can find it. We should never +<pb n='122'/><anchor id='Pg122'/> +have known that <emph>priest</emph> meant originally <emph>an elder</emph>, unless +we had traced it back to its original form <emph>presbyter</emph>, +in which a Greek scholar at once recognizes the comparative +of <emph>presbys</emph>, old. If left to modern English +alone, we might attempt to connect <emph>priest</emph> with <emph>praying</emph> +or <emph>preaching</emph>, but we should not thus arrive at its true +derivation. The modern word <emph>Gospel</emph> conveys no +meaning at all. As soon as we trace it back to the +original <emph>Goddspell</emph>, we see that it is a literal translation +of <emph>Evangelium</emph>, or good news, good tidings.<note place='foot'><p> +<q>Goddspell onn Ennglissh nemmnedd iss<lb/> +God word, annd god tiþennde,<lb/> +God errnde,</q> &c.—<hi rend='italic'>Ormulum</hi>, pref. 157. +</p> +<p> +<q>And beode þer godes godd-spel.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Layamon</hi>, +iii. 182, v. 29, 507.</p></note> <emph>Lord</emph> +would be nothing but an empty title in English, unless +we could discover its original form and meaning in the +Anglo-Saxon <emph>hlafford</emph>, meaning a giver of bread, from +<emph>hlaf</emph>, a loaf, and <emph>ford</emph>, to give. +</p> + +<p> +But even after this is done, after we have traced a +modern English word back to Anglo-Saxon, it follows +by no means that we should there find it in its original +form, or that we should succeed in forcing it to disclose +its original intention. Anglo-Saxon is not an original +or aboriginal language. It points by its very name +to the Saxons and Angles of the continent. We +have, therefore, to follow our word from Anglo-Saxon +through the various Saxon and Low-German dialects, +till we arrive at last at the earliest stage of German +which is within our reach, the Gothic of the fourth +century after Christ. Even here we cannot rest. For, +although we cannot trace Gothic back to any earlier +Teutonic language, we see at once that Gothic, too, +is a modern language, and that it must have passed +<pb n='123'/><anchor id='Pg123'/> +through numerous phases of growth before it became +what it is in the mouth of Bishop Ulfilas. +</p> + +<p> +What then are we to do?—We must try to do +what is done when we have to deal with the modern +Romance languages. If we could not trace a French +word back to Latin, we should look for its corresponding +form in Italian, and endeavor to trace the Italian +to its Latin source. If, for instance, we were doubtful +about the origin of the French word for fire, <emph>feu</emph>, we +have but to look to the Italian <emph>fuoco</emph>, in order to see at +once that both <emph>fuoco</emph> and <emph>feu</emph> are derived from the Latin +<emph>focus</emph>. We can do this, because we know that French +and Italian are cognate dialects, and because we have +ascertained beforehand the exact degree of relationship +in which they stand to each other. Had we, instead +of looking to Italian, looked to German for an explanation +of the French <emph>feu</emph>, we should have missed the +right track; for the German <emph>feuer</emph>, though more like +<emph>feu</emph> than the Italian <emph>fuoco</emph>, could never have assumed +in French the form <emph>feu</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +Again, in the case of the preposition <emph>hors</emph>, which in +French means <emph>without</emph>, we can more easily determine +its origin after we have found that <emph>hors</emph> corresponds +with the Italian <emph>fuora</emph>, the Spanish <emph>fuera</emph>. The French +<emph>fromage</emph>, cheese, derives no light from Latin. But as +soon as we compare the Italian <emph>formaggio</emph>,<note place='foot'>Diez, +Lexicon Comparativum. Columella, vii. 8.</note> we see that +<emph>formaggio</emph> and <emph>fromage</emph> are derived from <emph>forma</emph>; +cheese being made in Italy by keeping the milk in small baskets +or forms. <emph>Feeble</emph>, the French <emph>faible</emph>, is clearly +derived from Latin; but it is not till we see the +Italian <emph>fievole</emph> that we are reminded of the Latin <emph>flebilis</emph>, +tearful. We should never have found the etymology, +<pb n='124'/><anchor id='Pg124'/> +that is to say the origin, of the French <emph>payer</emph>, the +English <emph>to pay</emph>, if we did not consult the dictionary +of the cognate dialects, such as Italian and Spanish. +Here we find that <emph>to pay</emph> is expressed in Italian by +<emph>pagare</emph>, in Spanish by <emph>pagar</emph>, whereas in Provençal +we actually find the two forms <emph>pagar</emph> and <emph>payar</emph>. Now +<emph>pagar</emph> clearly points back to Latin <emph>pacare</emph>, which means +<emph>to pacify</emph>, <emph>to appease</emph>. To appease a creditor meant to +pay him; in the same manner as <emph>une quittance</emph>, a quittance +or receipt, was originally <emph>quietantia</emph>, a quieting, +from <emph>quietus</emph>, quiet. +</p> + +<p> +If, therefore, we wish to follow up our researches,—if, +not satisfied with having traced an English word +back to Gothic, we want to know what it was at a still +earlier period of its growth,—we must determine +whether there are any languages that stand to Gothic +in the same relation in which Italian and Spanish stand +to French;—we must restore, as far as possible, the +genealogical tree of the various families of human +speech. In doing this we enter on the second or +classificatory stage of our science; for genealogy, +where it is applicable, is the most perfect form of +classification. +</p> + +<p> +Before we proceed to examine the results which +have been obtained by the recent labors of Schlegel, +Humboldt, Bopp, Burnouf, Pott, Benfey, Prichard, +Grimm, Kuhn, Curtius, and others in this branch of +the science of language, it will be well to glance at +what had been achieved before their time in the classification +of the numberless dialects of mankind. +</p> + +<p> +The Greeks never thought of applying the principle +of classification to the varieties of human speech. +They only distinguished between Greek on one side, +<pb n='125'/><anchor id='Pg125'/> +and all other languages on the other, comprehended +under the convenient name of <q>Barbarous.</q> They +succeeded, indeed, in classifying four of their own +dialects with tolerable correctness,<note place='foot'>Strabo, viii. p. +833. Τὴν μὲν Ἰάδα τῇ παλαιᾷ Ἀτθίδι τὴν αὐτὴν φαμέν, +τὴν δὲ Δωρίδα τῇ Αἰολίδι.</note> but they applied +the term <q>barbarous</q> so promiscuously to the other +more distant relatives of Greek, (the dialects of the +Pelasgians, Carians, Macedonians, Thracians, and Illyrians,) +that, for the purposes of scientific classification, +it is almost impossible to make any use of the statements +of ancient writers about these so-called barbarous +idioms.<note place='foot'><p>Herodotus (vii. 94, 509) gives Pelasgi as the old name of +the Æolians and of the Ionians in the Peloponnesus and the islands. Nevertheless he +argues (i. 57), from the dialect spoken in his time by the Pelasgi of the +towns of Kreston, Plakia, and Skylake, that the old Pelasgi spoke a barbarous +tongue (βάρβαρον τὴν γλῶσσαν ἱέντες). He has, therefore, to admit +that the Attic race, being originally Pelasgic, unlearnt its language (τὸ +Ἀττικὸν ἔθνος ἐὸν Πελασγικόν, ἅμα τῇ μεταβόλη τῇ ἐς Ἕλληνας, καὶ τὴν +γλῶσσαν μετέμαθε). See Diefenbach, Origines Europææ, p. 59. Dionysius +of Halicarnassus (i. 17) avoids this difficulty by declaring the Pelasgi +to have been from the beginning a Hellenic race. This however, is +merely his own theory. The <emph>Karians</emph> are called βαρβαρόφωνοι by Homer +(II. v. 867); but Strabo (xiv. 662) takes particular care to show that they +are not therefore to be considered as βάρβαροι. He distinguishes between +βαρβαροφωνεῖν, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>, κακῶς ἑλληνίζειν, and Καριστὶ λαλαεῖν, +καρίζειν καὶ βαρβαρίζειν. But the same Strabo says that the Karians were formerly +called Λέλεγεs (xii. p. 572); and these, together with Pelasgians and Kaukones, +are reckoned by him (vii. p. 321) as the earlier <emph>barbarous</emph> inhabitants +of Hellas. Again he (vii. p. 321), as well as Aristotle and Dionysius +of Halicarnassus (i. 17), considers the Locrians as descendants of the +Leleges, though they would hardly call the Locrians barbarians. +</p> +<p> +The <emph>Macedonians</emph> are mentioned by Strabo (x. p. 460) together with +<q>the other Hellenes.</q> Demosthenes speaks of Alexander as a barbarian; +Isokrates as a Heraclide. To judge from a few extant words, Macedonian +might have been a Greek dialect. (Diefenbach, Orig. Europ. p. 62.) Justine +(vii. 1) says of the Macedonians, <q>Populus Pelasgi, regio Pæonia dicebatur.</q> +There was a tradition that the country occupied by the Macedonians +belonged formerly to Thracians or Pierians (Thuc. ii. 99; Strabo, vii. +p. 321); part of it to Thessalians (ibid.). +</p> +<p> +The <emph>Thracians</emph> are called by Herodotus (v. 3) the greatest people after +the Indians. They are distinguished by Strabo from Illyrians (Diefenbach, +p. 65), from Celts (ibid.), and from Scythians (Thuc. ii. 96). What +we know of their language rests on a statement of Strabo (vii. 303, 305), +that the Thracians spoke the same language as the Getæ, and the Getæ the +same as the Dacians. We possess fragments of Dacian speech in the botanical +names collected by Dioskorides, and these, as interpreted by Grimm, +are clearly Aryan, though not Greek. The Dacians are called barbarians +by Strabo, together with Illyrians and Epirotes. (Strabo, vii. p. 321.) +</p> +<p> +The <emph>Illyrians</emph> were barbarians in the eyes of the Greeks. They are now +considered as an independent branch of the Aryan family. Herodotus +refers the Veneti to the Illyrians (i. 196); and the Veneti, according +to Polybius (ii. 17), who knew them, spoke a language different from +that of the Celts. He adds that they were an old race, and in their manner +and dress like the Celts. Hence many writers have mistaken them +for Celts, neglecting the criterion of language, on which Polybius lays +such proper stress. The Illyrians were a widely extended race; the Pannonians, +the Dalmatians, and the Dardanians (from whom the Dardanelles +were called), are all spoken of as Illyrians. (Diefenbach, Origines Europææ, +pp. 74, 75.) It is lost labor to try to extract anything positive from +the statements of the Greeks and Romans on the race and the language of +their barbarian neighbors. +</p></note> +</p> + +<pb n='126'/><anchor id='Pg126'/> + +<p> +Plato, indeed, in his Cratylus (c. 36), throws out a +hint that the Greeks might have received their own +words from the barbarians, the barbarians being older +than the Greeks. But he was not able to see the full +bearing of this remark. He only points out that some +words, such as the names of <emph>fire</emph>, +<emph>water</emph>, and <emph>dog</emph>, were +the same in Phrygian and Greek; and he supposes that +the Greeks borrowed them from the Phrygians (c. 26). +The idea that the Greek language and that of the barbarians +could have had a common source never entered +his mind. It is strange that even so comprehensive a +mind as that of Aristotle should have failed to perceive +in languages some of that law and order which he +tried to discover in every realm of nature. As Aristotle, +however, did not attempt this, we need not wonder +that it was not attempted by any one else for the +next two thousand years. The Romans, in all scientific +<pb n='127'/><anchor id='Pg127'/> +matters, were merely the parrots of the Greeks. +Having themselves been called barbarians, they soon +learnt to apply the same name to all other nations, +except, of course, to their masters, the Greeks. Now +<emph>barbarian</emph> is one of those lazy expressions which seem +to say everything but in reality say nothing. It was +applied as recklessly as the word <emph>heretic</emph> during the +Middle Ages. If the Romans had not received this +convenient name of barbarian ready made for them, +they would have treated their neighbors, the Celts +and Germans, with more respect and sympathy: they +would, at all events, have looked at them with a more +discriminating eye. And, if they had done so, they +would have discovered, in spite of outward differences, +that these barbarians were, after all, not very +distant cousins. There was as much similarity between +the language of Cæsar and the barbarians +against whom he fought in Gaul and Germany as +there was between his language and that of Homer. +A man of Cæsar's sagacity would have seen this, if he +had not been blinded by traditional phraseology. I +am not exaggerating. For let us look at one instance +only. If we take a verb of such constant occurrence +as <emph>to have</emph>, we shall find the paradigms almost identical +in Latin and Gothic:— +</p> + +<lg> +<l>I have in Latin is habeo, in Gothic haba.</l> +<l>Thou hast in Latin is habes, in Gothic habais.</l> +<l>He has in Latin is habet, in Gothic habaiþ.</l> +<l>We have in Latin is habemus, in Gothic habam.</l> +<l>You have in Latin is habetis, in Gothic habaiþ.</l> +<l>They have in Latin is habent, in Gothic habant.</l> +</lg> + +<p> +It surely required a certain amount of blindness, or +rather of deafness, not to perceive such similarity, and +<pb n='128'/><anchor id='Pg128'/> +that blindness or deafness arose, I believe, entirely from +the single word <emph>barbarian</emph>. Not till that word barbarian +was struck out of the dictionary of mankind, and +replaced by brother, not till the right of all nations of +the world to be classed as members of one genus or +kind was recognized, can we look even for the first +beginnings of our science. This change was effected +by Christianity. To the Hindú, every man not twice-born +was a Mlechha; to the Greek, every man not +speaking Greek was a barbarian; to the Jew, every +person not circumcised was a Gentile; to the Mohammedan, +every man not believing in the prophet is a +Giaur or Kaffir. It was Christianity which first broke +down the barriers between Jew and Gentile, between +Greek and barbarian, between the white and the black. +<emph>Humanity</emph> is a word which you look for in vain in Plato +or Aristotle; the idea of mankind as one family, as the +children of one God, is an idea of Christian growth; +and the science of mankind, and of the languages of +mankind, is a science which, without Christianity, +would never have sprung into life. When people +had been taught to look upon all men as brethren, +then, and then only, did the variety of human speech +present itself as a problem that called for a solution in +the eyes of thoughtful observers; and I, therefore, date +the real beginning of the science of language from the +first day of Pentecost. After that day of cloven +tongues a new light is spreading over the world, and +objects rise into view which had been hidden from the +eyes of the nations of antiquity. Old words assume a +new meaning, old problems a new interest, old sciences +a new purpose. The common origin of mankind, the +differences of race and language, the susceptibility of +<pb n='129'/><anchor id='Pg129'/> +all nations of the highest mental culture, these become, +in the new world in which we live, problems of scientific, +because of more than scientific, interest. It is no +valid objection that so many centuries should have +elapsed before the spirit which Christianity infused into +every branch of scientific inquiry produced visible results. +We see in the oaken fleet which rides the ocean +the small acorn which was buried in the ground hundreds +of years ago, and we recognize in the philosophy +of Albertus Magnus,<note place='foot'>Albert, Count of +Bollstädten, or, as he is more generally called, Albertus +Magnus, the pioneer of modern physical science, wrote: <q>God has +given to man His spirit, and with it also intellect, that man might use it +for to know God. And God is known through the soul and by faith from +the Bible, through the intellect from nature.</q> And again: <q>It is to the +praise and glory of God, and for the benefit of our brethren, that we study +the nature of created things. In all of them, not only in the harmonious +formation of every single creature, but likewise in the variety of different +forms, we can and we ought to admire the majesty and wisdom of God.</q></note> +though nearly 1200 years after the death of Christ, in the aspirations +of Kepler,<note place='foot'><p>These are the last words in Kepler's +<q>Harmony of the World,</q> <q>Thou +who by the light of nature hast kindled in us the longing after the light +of Thy grace, in order to raise us to the light of Thy glory, thanks to Thee, +Creator and Lord, that Thou lettest me rejoice in Thy works. Lo, I have +done the work of my life with that power of intellect which Thou hast +given. I have recorded to men the glory of Thy works, as far as my mind +could comprehend their infinite majesty. My senses were awake to search +as far as I could, with purity and faithfulness. If I, a worm before thine +eyes, and born in the bonds of sin, have brought forth anything that is +unworthy of Thy counsels, inspire me with Thy spirit, that I may correct +it. If, by the wonderful beauty of Thy works, I have been led into boldness, +if I have sought my own honor among men as I advanced in the +work which was destined to Thine honor, pardon me in kindness and charity, +and by Thy grace grant that my teaching may be to Thy glory, and +the welfare of all men. Praise ye the Lord, ye heavenly Harmonies, and +ye that understand the new harmonies, praise the Lord. Praise God, O my +soul, as long as I live. From Him, through Him, and in Him is all, the +material as well as the spiritual—all that we know and all that we know +not yet—for there is much to do that is yet undone.</q> +</p> +<p> +These words are all the more remarkable, because written by a man who +was persecuted by theologians as a heretic, but who nevertheless was not +ashamed to profess himself a Christian. +</p> +<p> +I end with an extract from one of the most distinguished of living +naturalists:—<q>The +antiquarian recognizes at once the workings of intelligence +in the remains of an ancient civilization. He may fail to ascertain their +age correctly, he may remain doubtful as to the order in which they were +successively constructed, but the character of the whole tells him they are +works of art, and that men like himself originated these relics of by-gone +ages. So shall the intelligent naturalist read at once in the pictures which +nature presents to him, the works of a higher Intelligence; he shall recognize +in the minute perforated cells of the coniferæ, which differ so wonderfully +from those of other plants, the hieroglyphics of a peculiar age; in +their needle-like leaves, the escutcheon of a peculiar dynasty; in their repeated +appearance under most diversified circumstances, a thoughtful and +thought-eliciting adaptation. He beholds, indeed, the works of a being +<emph>thinking</emph> like himself, but he feels, at the same time, that he stands as +much below the Supreme Intelligence, in wisdom, power, and goodness, as the works +of art are inferior to the wonders of nature. Let naturalists look at the +world under such impressions, and evidence will pour in upon us that all +creatures are expressions of the thoughts of Him whom we know, love, +and adore unseen.</q></p></note> and +in the researches of the greatest philosophers of our +own age, the sound of that key-note of thought which +had been struck for the first time by the apostle of the +<pb n='130'/><anchor id='Pg130'/> +Gentiles:<note place='foot'>Rom. i. 20.</note> +<q><emph>For the invisible things of Him from the +creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood +by the things that are made, even His eternal power and +Godhead</emph>.</q> +</p> + +<p> +But we shall see that the science of language owes +more than its first impulse to Christianity. The pioneers +of our science were those very apostles who were +commanded <q>to go into all the world, and preach the +Gospel to every creature,</q> and their true successors, the +missionaries of the whole Christian Church. Translations +of the Lord's Prayer or of the Bible into every +dialect of the world, form even now the most valuable +materials for the comparative philologist. As long as +the number of known languages was small, the idea of +<pb n='131'/><anchor id='Pg131'/> +classification hardly suggested itself. The mind must +be bewildered by the multiplicity of facts before it has recourse +to division. As long as the only languages studied +were Greek, Latin, and Hebrew, the simple division +into sacred and profane, or classical and oriental, sufficed. +But when theologians extended their studies to Arabic, +Chaldee, and Syriac, a step, and a very important step, +was made towards the establishment of a class or family +of languages.<note place='foot'><p>Hervas (Catalogo, i. 37) +mentions the following works, published during +the sixteenth century, bearing on the science of language:—<q>Introductio +in Chaldaicam Linguam, Siriacam, atque Armenicam, et decem alias Linguas,</q> +a Theseo Ambrosio. Papiæ, 1539, 4to. <q>De Ratione communi +omnium Linguarum et Litterarum Commentarius,</q> a Theodoro Bibliandro. +Tiguri, 1548, 4to. It contains the Lord's Prayer in fourteen languages. +Bibliander derives Welsh and Cornish from Greek, Greek having been carried +there from Marseilles, through France. He states that Armenian +differs little from Chaldee, and cites Postel, who derived the Turks from the +Armenians, because Turkish was spoken in Armenia. He treats the Persians +as descendants of Shem, and connects their language with Syriac and +Hebrew. Servian and Georgian are, according to him, dialects of Greek. +</p> +<p> +Other works on language published during the sixteenth century are:—<q>Perion. +Dialogorum de Linguæ Gallicæ origine ejusque cum Græca cognatione, +libri quatuor.</q> Parisiis, 1554. He says that as French is not mentioned +among the seventy-two languages which sprang from the Tower of +Babel, it must be derived from Greek. He quotes Cæsar (de Bello Gallico, +vi. 14) to prove that the Druids spoke Greek, and then derives from it the +modern French language! +</p> +<p> +The works of Henri Estienne (1528-1598) stand on a much sounder basis. +He has been unjustly accused of having derived French from Greek. See +his <q>Traicté de la Conformité du Langage français avec le grec;</q> about +1566. It contains chiefly syntactical and grammatical remarks, and its object +is to show that modes of expression in Greek, which sound anomalous +and difficult, can be rendered easy by a comparison of analogous expressions +in French. +</p> +<p> +The Lord's Prayer was published in 1548 in fourteen languages, by +Bibliander; in 1591 in twenty-six languages, by Roccha (<q>Bibliotheca +Apostolica Vaticana,</q> a fratre Angelo Roccha: Romæ, 1591, 4to.); in 1592 +in forty languages, by Megiserus (<q>Specimen XL. Linguarum et Dialectorum +ab Hieronymo Megisero à diversis auctoribus collectarum quibus +Oratio Dominica est expressa:</q> Francofurti, 1592); in 1593, in fifty languages, +by the same author (<q>Oratio Dominica L. diversis linguis,</q> cura H. +Megiseri: Francofurti, 1593, 8vo.).</p></note> +No one could help seeing that these languages +<pb n='132'/><anchor id='Pg132'/> +were most intimately related to each other, and +that they differed from Greek and Latin on all points +on which they agreed among themselves. As early as +1606 we find <hi rend='italic'>Guichard</hi>,<note place='foot'><p>At +the beginning of the seventeenth century was published <q>Trésor de +l'Histoire des Langues de cet Univers,</q> par Claude Duret; seconde edition: +Iverdon, 1619, 4to. Hervas says that Duret repeats the mistakes of Postel, +Bibliander, and other writers of the sixteenth century. +</p> +<p> +Before Duret came Estienne Guichard, <q>l'Harmonie Etymologique des +Langues Hebraique, Chaldaique, Syriaque—Greque—Latine, Françoise, +Italienne, Espagnole—Allemande, Flamende, Anglaise, &c.:</q> Paris, +1606. +</p> +<p> +Hervas only knows the second edition, Paris, 1618, and thinks the first +was published in 1608. The title of his book shows that Guichard distinguished +between four classes of languages, which we should now call the +Semitic, the Hellenic, Italic, and Teutonic: he derives, however, Greek from +Hebrew. +</p> +<p> +I. I. Scaliger, in his <q>Diatriba de Europæorum Linguis</q> (Opuscula varia: +Parisiis, 1610), p. 119, distinguishes eleven classes: Latin, Greek, Teutonic, +Slavonic, Epirotic or Albanian, Tartaric, Hungarian, Finnic, Irish, British +in Wales and Brittany, and Bask or Cantabrian.</p></note> +in his <q>Harmonie Etymologique,</q> +placing Hebrew, Chaldee, and Syriac as a class +of languages by themselves, and distinguishing besides +between the Romance and Teutonic dialects. +</p> + +<p> +What prevented, however, for a long time the progress +of the science of language was the idea that Hebrew +was the primitive language of mankind, and that, +therefore, all languages must be derived from Hebrew. +The fathers of the Church never expressed any doubt on +this point. St. Jerome, in one of his epistles to Damasus,<note place='foot'><q>Initium +oris et communis eloquii, et hoc omne quod loquimur, Hebræam +esse linguam qua vetus Testamentum scriptum est, universa antiquitas +tradidit.</q> In another place (Isaia, c. 7) he writes, <q>Omnium enim +fere linguarum verbis utuntur Hebræi.</q></note> +writes: <q>the whole of antiquity (universa antiquitas) +affirms that Hebrew, in which the Old Testament +is written, was the beginning of all human speech.</q> +Origen, in his eleventh Homily on the book of Numbers, +expresses his belief that the Hebrew language, originally +<pb n='133'/><anchor id='Pg133'/> +given through Adam, remained in that part of the +world which was the chosen portion of God, not left like +the rest to one of His angels.<note place='foot'><q>Mansit +lingua per Adam primitus data, ut putamus, Hebræa, in +ea parte hominum, quæ non pars alicujus angeli, sed quæ +Dei portio permansit.</q></note> When, therefore, the +first attempts at a classification of languages were made, +the problem, as it presented itself to scholars such as +Guichard and Thomassin, was this: <q>As Hebrew is +undoubtedly the mother of all languages, how are we to +explain the process by which Hebrew became split into +so many dialects, and how can these numerous dialects, +such as Greek, and Latin, Coptic, Persian, Turkish, be +traced back to their common source, the Hebrew?</q> +</p> + +<p> +It is astonishing what an amount of real learning and +ingenuity was wasted on this question during the seventeenth +and eighteenth centuries. It finds, perhaps, but +one parallel in the laborious calculations and constructions +of early astronomers, who had to account for the +movements of the heavenly bodies, always taking it for +granted that the earth must be the fixed centre of our +planetary system. But, although we know now that +the labors of such scholars as Thomassin were, and +could not be otherwise than fruitless, it would be a most +discouraging view to take of the progress of the human +race, were we to look upon the exertions of eminent +men in former ages, though they may have been in a +wrong direction, as mere vanity and vexation of spirit. +We must not forget that the very fact of the failure of +such men contributed powerfully to a general conviction +that there must be something wrong in the problem itself, +till at last a bolder genius inverted the problem and +thereby solved it. When books after books had been +<pb n='134'/><anchor id='Pg134'/> +written to show how Greek and Latin and all other +languages were derived from Hebrew,<note place='foot'>Guichard +went so far as to maintain that as Hebrew was written from +right to left, and Greek from left to right, Greek words might be traced +back to Hebrew by being simply read from right to left.</note> and when not +one single system proved satisfactory, people asked at +last—<q>Why then <emph>should</emph> all languages be derived from +Hebrew?</q>—and this very question solved the problem. +It might have been natural for theologians in the fourth +and fifth centuries, many of whom knew neither Hebrew +nor any language except their own, to take it for granted +that Hebrew was the source of all languages, but there +is neither in the Old nor the New Testament a single +word to necessitate this view. Of the language of +Adam we know nothing; but if Hebrew, as we know +it, was one of the languages that sprang from the confusion +of tongues at Babel, it could not well have been +the language of Adam or of the whole earth, <q>when +the whole earth was still of one speech.</q><note place='foot'>Among +the different systems of Rabbinical exegesis, there is one according +to which every letter in Hebrew is reduced to its numerical value, +and the word is explained by another of the same quantity; thus, from the +passage, <q>And all the inhabitants of the earth were of one language.</q> +(Gen. xi. 1), is deduced that they all spoke Hebrew, שכה being changed +for its synonym לשון, and הקרש, (5 + 100 + 4 + 300 = 409) is substituted for +its equivalent אחת (1 + 8 + 400 = 409). <hi rend='italic'>Coheleth</hi>, +ed. Ginsburg, p. 31.</note> +</p> + +<p> +Although, therefore, a certain advance was made +towards a classification of languages by the Semitic +scholars of the seventeenth century, yet this partial +advance became in other respects an impediment. +The purely scientific interest in arranging languages +according to their characteristic features was lost sight +of, and erroneous ideas were propagated, the influence +of which has even now not quite subsided. +</p> + +<p> +The first who really conquered the prejudice that +<pb n='135'/><anchor id='Pg135'/> +Hebrew was the source of all language was Leibniz, +the cotemporary and rival of Newton. <q>There is as +much reason,</q> he said, <q>for supposing Hebrew to have +been the primitive language of mankind, as there is for +adopting the view of Goropius, who published a work +at Antwerp, in 1580, to prove that Dutch was the +language spoken in Paradise.</q><note place='foot'><p>Hermathena +Joannis Goropii Becani: Antuerpiæ, 1580. Origines Antverpianæ, +1569. André Kempe, in his work on the language of Paradise, +maintains that God spoke to Adam in Swedish, Adam answered in Danish, +and the serpent spoke to Eve in French. +</p> +<p> +Chardin relates that the Persians believe three languages to have been +spoken in Paradise; Arabic by the serpent, Persian by Adam and Eve, and +Turkish by Gabriel. +</p> +<p> +J. B. Erro, in his <q>El mundo primitivo,</q> Madrid, 1814, claims Bask as +the language spoken by Adam. +</p> +<p> +A curious discussion took place about two hundred years ago in the Metropolitan +Chapter of Pampeluna. The decision, as entered in the minutes +of the chapter, is as follows:—1. Was Bask the primitive language of +mankind? The learned members confess that, in spite of their strong conviction +on the subject, they dare not give an affirmative answer. 2. Was +Bask the only language spoken by Adam and Eve in Paradise? On this +point the chapter declares that no doubt can exist in their minds, and that +<q>it is impossible to bring forward any serious or rational objection.</q> See +Hennequin, <q>Essai sur l'Analogie des Langues,</q> Bordeaux, 1838. p. 60.</p></note> In a +letter to Tenzel, Leibniz writes: <q>To call Hebrew the primitive language, +is like calling branches of a tree primitive +branches, or like imagining that in some country hewn +trunks could grow instead of trees. Such ideas may +be conceived, but they do not agree with the laws of +nature, and with the harmony of the universe, that is +to say with the Divine Wisdom.</q><note place='foot'>Guhrauer's +Life of Leibniz, ii. p. 129.</note> +</p> + +<p> +But Leibniz did more than remove this one great +stumbling-block from the threshold of the science of +language. He was the first to apply the principle of +sound inductive reasoning to a subject which before +him had only been treated at random. He pointed +<pb n='136'/><anchor id='Pg136'/> +out the necessity of collecting, first of all, as large a +number of facts as possible.<note place='foot'>Guhrauer, vol. +ii. p. 127. In his <q>Dissertation on the Origin of Nations,</q> +1710, Leibniz says:—<q>The study of languages must not be conducted +according to any other principles but those of the exact sciences. +Why begin with the unknown instead of the known? It stands to reason +that we ought to begin with studying the modern languages which are +within our reach, in order to compare them with one another, to discover +their differences and affinities, and then to proceed to those which have +preceded them in former ages, in order to show their filiation and their +origin, and then to ascend step by step to the most ancient tongues, the +analysis of which must lead us to the only trustworthy conclusions.</q></note> +He appealed to missionaries, travellers, ambassadors, princes, and emperors, to +help him in a work which he had so much at heart. +The Jesuits in China had to work for him. +Witsen,<note place='foot'>Nicolaes Witsen, Burgomaster of Amsterdam, travelled in Russia, +1666-1677; published his travels in 1672, dedicated to Peter the Great. +Second edition, 1705. It contains many collections of words.</note> +the traveller, sent him a most precious present, a translation +of the Lord's Prayer into the jargon of the Hottentots. +<q>My friend,</q> writes Leibniz in thanking him, +<q>remember, I implore you, and remind your Muscovite +friends, to make researches in order to procure +specimens of the Scythian languages, the Samoyedes, +Siberians, Bashkirs, Kalmuks, Tungusians, and others.</q> +Having made the acquaintance of Peter the Great, +Leibniz wrote to him the following letter, dated Vienna, +October the 26th, 1713:— +</p> + +<p> +<q>I have suggested that the numerous languages, +hitherto almost entirely unknown and unstudied, which +are current in the empire of your Majesty and on its +frontiers, should be reduced to writing; also that dictionaries, +or at least small vocabularies, should be collected, +and translations be procured in such languages +of the Ten Commandments, the Lord's Prayer, the +Apostolic Symbolum, and other parts of the Catechism, +<pb n='137'/><anchor id='Pg137'/> +<emph>ut omnis lingua laudet Dominum</emph>. This would increase +the glory of your Majesty, who reigns over so many +nations, and is so anxious to improve them; and it +would, likewise, by means of a comparison of languages, +enable us to discover the origin of those nations +who from Scythia, which is subject to your +Majesty, advanced into other countries. But principally +it would help to plant Christianity among the +nations speaking those dialects, and I have, therefore, +addressed the Most Rev. Metropolitan on the same +subject.</q><note place='foot'>Catherinens der Grossen Verdienste um die Vergleichende +Sprachkunde, von F. Adelung. Petersburg, 1815. Another letter of his to the +Vice-Chancellor, Baron Schaffiroff, is dated Pirmont, June 22, 1716.</note> +</p> + +<p> +Leibniz drew up a list of the most simple and necessary +terms which should be selected for comparison in +various languages. At home, while engaged in historical +researches, he collected whatever could throw light +on the origin of the German language, and he encouraged +others, such as Eccard, to do the same. He +pointed out the importance of dialects, and even of provincial +and local terms, for elucidating the etymological +structure of languages.<note place='foot'>Collectanea Etymologica, ii. 255. +<q>Malim sine discrimine Dialectorum +corrogari Germanicas voces. Puto quasdam origines ex superioribus Dialectis +melius apparituras; ut ex Ulfilæ Pontogothicis, Otfridi Franciscis.</q></note> +Leibniz never undertook a systematic classification of the whole realm of language, +nor was he successful in classing the dialects with +which he had become acquainted. He distinguished +between a Japhetic and Aramaic class, the former +occupying the north, the latter the south, of the continent +of Asia and Europe. He believed in a common +origin of languages, and in a migration of the human +race from east to west. But he failed to distinguish +<pb n='138'/><anchor id='Pg138'/> +the exact degrees of relationship in which languages +stood to each other, and he mixed up some of the +Turanian dialects, such as Finnish and Tataric, with +the Japhetic family of speech. If Leibniz had found +time to work out all the plans which his fertile and +comprehensive genius conceived, or if he had been +understood and supported by cotemporary scholars, the +science of language, as one of the inductive sciences, +might have been established a century earlier. But a +man like Leibniz, who was equally distinguished as a +scholar, a theologian, a lawyer, an historian, and a mathematician, +could only throw out hints as to how language +ought to be studied. Leibniz was not only the +discoverer of the differential calculus. He was one +of the first to watch the geological stratification of +the earth. He was engaged in constructing a calculating +machine, the idea of which he first conceived +as a boy. He drew up an elaborate plan of an expedition +to Egypt, which he submitted to Louis XIV. in +order to avert his attention from the frontiers of Germany. +The same man was engaged in a long correspondence +with Bossuet to bring about a reconciliation +between Protestants and Romanists, and he endeavored, +in his Theodicée and other works, to defend the +cause of truth and religion against the inroads of the +materialistic philosophy of England and France. It +has been said, indeed, that the discoveries of Leibniz +produced but little effect, and that most of them had +to be made again. This is not the case, however, with +regard to the science of language. The new interest +in languages, which Leibniz had called into life, did +not die again. After it had once been recognized as +a desideratum to bring together a complete <hi rend='italic'>Herbarium</hi> +<pb n='139'/><anchor id='Pg139'/> +of the languages of mankind, missionaries and travellers +felt it their duty to collect lists of words, and draw +up grammars wherever they came in contact with a +new race. The two great works in which, at the beginning +of our century, the results of these researches +were summed up, I mean the Catalogue of Languages +by Hervas, and the Mithridates of Adelung, can both +be traced back directly to the influence of Leibniz. +As to Hervas, he had read Leibniz carefully, and +though he differs from him on some points, he fully +acknowledges his merits in promoting a truly philosophical +study of languages. Of Adelung's Mithridates +and his obligations to Leibniz we shall have to +speak presently. +</p> + +<p> +Hervas lived from 1735 to 1809. He was a Spaniard +by birth, and a Jesuit by profession. While working +as a missionary among the Polyglottous tribes of +America, his attention was drawn to a systematic study +of languages. After his return, he lived chiefly at +Rome in the midst of the numerous Jesuit missionaries +who had been recalled from all parts of the world, and +who, by their communications on the dialects of the +tribes among whom they had been laboring, assisted +him greatly in his researches. +</p> + +<p> +Most of his works were written in Italian, and were +afterwards translated into Spanish. We cannot enter +into the general scope of his literary labors, which are +of the most comprehensive character. They were intended +to form a kind of Kosmos, for which he chose +the title of <q><hi rend='italic'>Idea del Universo</hi>.</q> What is of interest +to us is that portion which treats of man and language +as part of the universe; and here, again, chiefly his +Catalogue of Languages, in six volumes, published in +Spanish in the year 1800. +</p> + +<pb n='140'/><anchor id='Pg140'/> + +<p> +If we compare the work of Hervas with a similar +work which excited much attention towards the end +of the last century, and is even now more widely +known than Hervas, I mean Court de Gebelin's +<q>Monde Primitif,</q><note place='foot'>Monde +primitif analysé et comparé avec le monde moderne: Paris, +1773.</note> we shall see at once how far +superior the Spanish Jesuit is to the French philosopher. +Gebelin treats Persian, Armenian, Malay, and +Coptic as dialects of Hebrew; he speaks of Bask as +a dialect of Celtic, and he tries to discover Hebrew, +Greek, English, and French words in the idioms of +America. Hervas, on the contrary, though embracing +in his catalogue five times the number of languages +that were known to Gebelin, is most careful not to +allow himself to be carried away by theories not +warranted by the evidence before him. It is easy +now to point out mistakes and inaccuracies in Hervas, +but I think that those who have blamed him most are +those who ought most to have acknowledged their +obligations to him. To have collected specimens and +notices of more than 300 languages is no small matter. +But Hervas did more. He himself composed grammars +of more than forty languages.<note place='foot'>Catalogo, i. 63.</note> He was the first +to point out that the true affinities of languages must +be determined chiefly by grammatical evidence, not by +mere similarity of words.<note place='foot'><q>Mas se +deben consultar gramaticas para conocer su caracter proprio +por medio de su artificio gramatical.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Catalogo</hi>, +i. 65. The same principle +was expressed by Lord Monboddo, about 1795, in his Ancient Metaphysics, +vol. iv. p. 326. <q>My last observation is, that, as the art of a +language is less arbitrary and more determined by rule than either the +sound or sense of words, it is one of the principal things by which the connection +of languages with one another is to be discovered. And, therefore, +when we find that two languages practise these great arts of language,—derivation, +composition, and flexion,—in the same way, we may conclude, +I think, with great certainty, that the one language is the original of the +other, or that they are both dialects of the same language.</q></note> +He proved, by a comparative +<pb n='141'/><anchor id='Pg141'/> +list of declensions and conjugations, that Hebrew, +Chaldee, Syriac, Arabic, Ethiopic, and Amharic are +all but dialects of one original language, and constitute +one family of speech, the Semitic.<note place='foot'>Catalogo, ii. 468.</note> He scouted +the idea of deriving all the languages of mankind from +Hebrew. He had perceived clear traces of affinity in +Hungarian, Lapponian, and Finnish, three dialects +now classed as members of the Turanian family.<note place='foot'>Ibid. +i. 49. Witsen, too, in a letter to Leibniz, dated Mai 22, 1698, +alludes to the affinity between the Tataric and Mongolic languages. <q>On +m'a dit que ces deux langues (la langue Moegale et Tartare) sont différentes +à peu près comme l'Allemand l'est du Flamand, et qu'il est de +même des Kalmucs et Moegals.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Collectanea +Etymologica</hi>, ii. p. 363.</note> He +had proved that Bask was not, as was commonly supposed, +a Celtic dialect, but an independent language, +spoken by the earliest inhabitants of Spain, as proved +by the names of the Spanish mountains and rivers.<note place='foot'>Leibniz +held the same opinion (see Hervas, Catalogo, i. 50), though he +considered the Celts in Spain as descendants of the Iberians.</note> +Nay, one of the most brilliant discoveries in the history +of the science of language, the establishment of +the Malay and Polynesian family of speech, extending +from the island of Madagascar east of Africa, over 208 +degrees of longitude, to the Easter Islands west of +America,<note place='foot'><p>Catalogo, i. 30. <q>Verá +que la lengua llamada <hi rend='italic'>malaya</hi>, la qual se habla +en la península de Malaca, es matriz de inumerables dialectos de naciones +isleñas, que desde dicha península se extienden por mas de doscientos grados +de longitud en los mares oriental y pacífico.</q> +</p> +<p> +Ibid. ii. 10. <q>De esta península de Malaca han salido enjambres de +pobladores de las islas del mar Indiano y Pacífico, en las que, aunque parece +haber otra nacion, que es de negros, la <emph>malaya</emph> es generalmente la mas +dominante y extendida. La lengua malaya se habla en dicha península, continente +del Asia, en las islas Maldivas, en la de Madagascar (perteneciente +al Africa), en las de Sonda, en las Molucas, en las Filipinas, en las del +archipiélago de San Lázaro, y en muchísimas del mar del Sur desde dicho +archipiélago hasta islas, que por su poca distancia de América se creian pobladas +por americanos. La isla de Madagascar se pone á 60 grados de +longitud, y á los 268 se pone la isla de Pasqua ó de Davis, en la que se +habla otro dialecto malayo; por lo que la extension de los dialectos malayos +es de 208 grados de longitud.</q></p></note> was made by Hervas long before it was +announced to the world by Humboldt. +</p> + +<pb n='142'/><anchor id='Pg142'/> + +<p> +Hervas was likewise aware of the great grammatical +similarity between Sanskrit and Greek, but the imperfect +information which he received from his friend, the +Carmelite missionary, Fra Paolino de San Bartolomeo, +the author of the first Sanskrit grammar, published at +Rome in 1790, prevented him from seeing the full +meaning of this grammatical similarity. How near +Hervas was to the discovery of the truth may be seen +from his comparing such words as <emph>theos</emph>, God, in Greek, +with <emph>Deva</emph>, God, in Sanskrit. He identified the Greek +auxiliary verb <emph>eimi</emph>, <emph>eis</emph>, <emph>esti</emph>, I am, thou art, he +is, with the Sanskrit <emph>asmi</emph>, <emph>asi</emph>, <emph>asti</emph>. He even +pointed out that the terminations of the three genders<note place='foot'>Catalogo, +ii. 134.</note> in Greek, <emph>os</emph>, <emph>ē</emph>, +<emph>on</emph>, are the same as the Sanskrit, <emph>as</emph>, +<emph>â</emph>, <emph>am</emph>. But believing, +as he did, that the Greeks derived their philosophy +and mythology from India,<note place='foot'>Ibid. ii. 135.</note> he supposed that +they had likewise borrowed from the Hindus some of +their words, and even the art of distinguishing the +gender of words. +</p> + +<p> +The second work which represents the science of +language at the beginning of this century, and which +is, to a still greater extent, the result of the impulse +which Leibniz had given, is the Mithridates of Adelung.<note place='foot'>The +first volume appeared in 1806. He died before the second volume +was published, which was brought out by Vater in 1809. The third and +fourth volumes followed in 1816 and 1817, edited by Vater and the younger +Adelung.</note> +Adelung's work depends partly on Hervas, +<pb n='143'/><anchor id='Pg143'/> +partly on the collections of words which had been made +under the auspices of the Russian government. Now +these collections are clearly due to Leibniz. Although +Peter the Great had no time or taste for philological +studies, the government kept the idea of collecting all +the languages of the Russian empire steadily in view.<note place='foot'>Evidence +of this is to be found in Strahlenberg's work on the <q>North +and East of Europe and Asia,</q> 1730; with tabula polyglotta, &c.; in Messerschmidt's +<q>Travels in Siberia,</q> from 1729-1739; in Bachmeister, <q>Idea +et desideria de colligendis linguarum speciminibus:</q> Petropoli, 1773; in +Güldenstädt's <q>Travels in the Caucasus,</q> &c.</note> +Still greater luck was in store for the science of language. +Having been patronized by Cæsar at Rome, it +found a still more devoted patroness in the great Cesarina +of the North, Catherine the Great (1762-1796). +Even as Grand-duchess Catherine was engrossed with +the idea of a Universal Dictionary, on the plan suggested +by Leibniz. She encouraged the chaplain of +the British Factory at St. Petersburg, the Rev. Daniel +Dumaresq, to undertake the work, and he is said to +have published, at her desire, a <q>Comparative Vocabulary +of Eastern Languages,</q> in quarto; a work, +however, which, if ever published, is now completely +lost. The reputed author died in London in 1805, at +the advanced age of eighty-four. When Catherine +came to the throne, her plans of conquest hardly absorbed +more of her time than her philological studies; +and she once shut herself up nearly a year, devoting +all her time to the compilation of her Comparative +Dictionary. A letter of hers to Zimmermann, dated the +9th of May, 1785, may interest some of my hearers:— +</p> + +<p> +<q>Your letter,</q> she writes, <q>has drawn me from the +solitude in which I had shut myself up for nearly nine +months, and from which I found it hard to stir. You +<pb n='144'/><anchor id='Pg144'/> +will not guess what I have been about. I will tell you, +for such things do not happen every day. I have been +making a list of from two to three hundred radical +words of the Russian language, and I have had them +translated into as many languages and jargons as I +could find. Their number exceeds already the second +hundred. Every day I took one of these words and +wrote it out in all the languages which I could collect. +This has taught me that the Celtic is like the Ostiakian: +that what means sky in one language means +cloud, fog, vault, in others; that the word God in certain +dialects means Good, the Highest, in others, sun +or fire. (Up to here her letter is written in French; +then follows a line of German.) I became tired of +my hobby, after I had read your book on Solitude. +(Then again in French.) But as I should have been +sorry to throw such a mass of paper in the fire;—besides, +the room, six fathoms in length, which I use +as a boudoir in my hermitage, was pretty well warmed—I +asked Professor Pallas to come to me, and after +making an honest confession of my sin, we agreed to +publish these collections, and thus make them useful +to those who like to occupy themselves with the forsaken +toys of others. We are only waiting for some +more dialects of Eastern Siberia. Whether the world +at large will or will not see in this work bright ideas +of different kinds, must depend on the disposition of +their minds, and does not concern me in the least.</q> +</p> + +<p> +If an empress rides a hobby, there are many ready +to help her. Not only were all Russian ambassadors +instructed to collect materials; not only did German +professors<note place='foot'>The empress wrote to Nicolai at Berlin to +ask him to draw up a catalogue of grammars and dictionaries. The work was sent to her in +manuscript from Berlin, in 1785.</note> supply grammars and dictionaries, but +<pb n='145'/><anchor id='Pg145'/> +Washington himself, in order to please the empress, +sent her list of words to all governors and generals +of the United States, enjoining them to supply the +equivalents from the American dialects. The first +volume of the Imperial Dictionary<note place='foot'><q>Glossarium +comparativum Linguarum totius Orbis:</q> Petersburg, +1787. A second edition, in which the words are arranged alphabetically, +appeared in 1790-91, in 4 vols., edited by Jankiewitsch de Miriewo. It contains +279 (272) languages, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> +171 for Asia, 55 for Europe, 30 for Africa, +and 23 for America. According to Pott, <q>Ungleichheit,</q> p. 230, it contains +277 languages, 185 for Asia, 22 for Europe, 28 for Africa, 15 for America. +This would make 280. It is a very scarce book.</note> appeared in 1787, +containing a list of 285 words translated into fifty-one +European, and 149 Asiatic languages. Though full +credit should be given to the empress for this remarkable +undertaking, it is but fair to remember that it was +the philosopher who, nearly a hundred years before, +sowed the seed that fell into good ground. +</p> + +<p> +As collections, the works of Hervas, of the Empress +Catherine, and of Adelung, are highly important, +though, such is the progress made in the classification +of languages during the last fifty years, that few people +would now consult them. Besides, the principle +of classification which is followed in these works can +hardly claim to be called scientific. Languages are arranged +geographically, as the languages of Europe, Asia, +Africa, America, and Polynesia, though, at the same +time, natural affinities are admitted which would unite +dialects spoken at a distance of 208 degrees. Languages +seemed to float about like islands on the ocean +of human speech; they did not shoot together to form +themselves into larger continents. This is a most critical +period in the history of every science, and if it +<pb n='146'/><anchor id='Pg146'/> +had not been for a happy accident, which, like an electric +spark, caused the floating elements to crystallize +into regular forms, it is more than doubtful whether +the long list of languages and dialects, enumerated and +described in the works of Hervas and Adelung, could +long have sustained the interest of the student of languages. +This electric spark was the discovery of Sanskrit. +Sanskrit is the ancient language of the Hindus. +It had ceased to be a spoken language at least 300 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi> +At that time the people of India spoke dialects standing +to the ancient Vedic Sanskrit in the relation of +Italian to Latin. We know some of these dialects, +for there were more than one in various parts of India, +from the inscriptions which the famous King Aśoka +had engraved on the rocks of Dhauli, Girnar, and +Kapurdigiri, and which have been deciphered by Prinsep, +Norris, Wilson, and Burnouf. We can watch +the further growth of these local dialects in the so-called +<emph>Pâli</emph>, the sacred language of Buddhism in Ceylon, +and once the popular dialect of the country where +Buddhism took its origin, the modern Behár, the ancient +Magadha.<note place='foot'>The Singhalese call Pali, +Mungata; the Burmese, Magadabâsâ.</note> We meet the same local dialects +again in what are called the Prâkrit idioms, used in +the later plays, in the sacred literature of the Jainas, +and in a few poetical compositions; and we see at last +how, through a mixture with the languages of the +various conquerors of India, the Arabic, Persian, +Mongolic, and Turkish, and through a concomitant +corruption of their grammatical system, they were +changed into the modern Hindí, Hindustání, Mahrattí, +and Bengálí. During all this time, however, +Sanskrit continued as the literary language of the +<pb n='147'/><anchor id='Pg147'/> +Brahmans. Like Latin, it did not die in giving birth +to its numerous offspring; and even at the present day, +an educated Brahman would write with greater fluency +in Sanskrit than in Bengálí. Sanskrit was what Greek +was at Alexandria, what Latin was during the Middle +Ages. It was the classical and at the same time the +sacred language of the Brahmans, and in it were written +their sacred hymns, the Vedas, and the later works, +such as the laws of Manu and the Purâņas. +</p> + +<p> +The existence of such a language as the ancient +idiom of the country, and the vehicle of a large literature, +was known at all times; and if there are still any +doubts, like those expressed by Dugald Stewart in his +<q>Conjectures concerning the Origin of the +Sanskrit,</q><note place='foot'>Works, vol. iii. p. 72.</note> +as to its age and authenticity, they will be best removed +by a glance at the history of India, and at the +accounts given by the writers of different nations that +became successively acquainted with the language and +literature of that country. +</p> + +<p> +The argument that nearly all the names of persons +and places in India mentioned by Greek and Roman +writers are pure Sanskrit, has been handled so fully +and ably by others, that nothing more remains to be +said. +</p> + +<p> +The next nation after the Greeks that became acquainted +with the language and literature of India was +the Chinese. Though Buddhism was not recognized +as a third state-religion before the year 65 <hi rend='smallcaps'>a. d.</hi>, under +the Emperor Ming-ti,<note place='foot'>M. M.'s +Buddhism and Buddhist Pilgrims, p. 23.</note> Buddhist missionaries reached +China from India as early as the third century <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi> +One Buddhist missionary is mentioned in the Chinese +<pb n='148'/><anchor id='Pg148'/> +annals in the year 217; and about the year 120 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi>, +a Chinese general, after defeating the barbarous tribes +north of the desert of Gobi, brought back as a trophy +a golden statue, the statue of Buddha. The very name +of Buddha, changed in Chinese into Fo-t'o and +Fo,<note place='foot'>Méthode pour déchiffrer et transcrire les noms Sanscrits qui se +rencontrent dans les livres chinois, inventée et démontrée par M. Stanislas +Julien: Paris, 1861, p. 103.</note> is +pure Sanskrit, and so is every word and every thought +of that religion. The language which the Chinese pilgrims +went to India to study, as the key to the sacred +literature of Buddhism, was Sanskrit. They call it +Fan; but Fan, as M. Stanislas Julien has shown, is an +abbreviation of Fan-lan-mo, and this is the only way +in which the Sanskrit Brahman could be rendered in +Chinese.<note place='foot'><q>Fan-chou (brahmâkshara), les +caractères de l'écriture indienne, inventée +par Fan, c'est-à-dire Fan-lan-mo (brahmâ).</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Stanislas Julien, +Voyages des Pèlerins Bouddhistes</hi>, vol. ii. p. 505.</note> We read of the Emperor +Ming-ti, of the dynasty of Han, sending Tsaï-in and other high officials +to India, in order to study there the doctrine of +Buddha. They engaged the services of two learned +Buddhists, Matânga and Tchou-fa-lan, and some of +the most important Buddhist works were translated by +them into Chinese. The intellectual intercourse between +the Indian peninsula and the northern continent +of Asia continued uninterrupted for several centuries. +Missions were sent from China to India to report on +the religious, political, social, and geographical state +of the country; and the chief object of interest, which +attracted public embassies and private pilgrims across +the Himalayan mountains, was the religion of Buddha. +About 300 years after the public recognition of Buddhism +by the Emperor Ming-ti, the great stream of +<pb n='149'/><anchor id='Pg149'/> +Buddhist pilgrims began to flow from China to India. +The first account which we possess of these pilgrimages +refers to the travels of Fa-hian, who visited India +towards the end of the fourth century. His travels +were translated into French by A. Remusat. After +Fa-hian, we have the travels of Hoei-seng and Song-yun, +who were sent to India, in 518, by command of +the empress, with the view of collecting sacred books +and relics. Then followed Hiouen-thsang, whose life +and travels, from 629-645, have been rendered so +popular by the excellent translation of M. Stanislas +Julien. After Hiouen-thsang the principal works of +Chinese pilgrims are the Itineraries of the Fifty-six +Monks, published in 730, and the travels of Khi-nie, +who visited India in 964, at the head of 300 pilgrims. +</p> + +<p> +That the language employed for literary purposes in +India during all this time was Sanskrit, we learn, not +only from the numerous names and religious and philosophical +terms mentioned in the travels of the Chinese +pilgrims, but from a short paradigm of declension and +conjugation in Sanskrit which one of them (Hiouen-thsang) +has inserted in his diary. +</p> + +<p> +As soon as the Muhammedans entered India, we +hear of translations of Sanskrit works into Persian and +Arabic.<note place='foot'>Sir Henry Elliot's Historians of +India, p. 259.</note> Harun-al-Rashid (786-809) had two Indians, +Manka and Saleh, at his court as physicians. +Manka translated the classical work on medicine, Suśruta, +and a treatise on poisons, ascribed to Châņakya, +from Sanskrit into Persian.<note place='foot'>See Professor +Flügel, in Zeitschrift der D. M. G., xi., s. 148 and 325.</note> During the Chalifate of +Al Mámúm, a famous treatise on Algebra was translated +by Muhammed ben Musa from Sanskrit into +Arabic (edited by F. Rosen). +</p> + +<pb n='150'/><anchor id='Pg150'/> + +<p> +About 1000 <hi rend='smallcaps'>a. d.</hi>, Abu Rihan al Birúni (born 970, +died 1038) spent forty years in India, and composed +his excellent work, the Taríkhu-l-Hind, which gives a +complete account of the literature and sciences of the +Hindus at that time. Al Birúni had been appointed +by the Sultan of Khawarazm to accompany an embassy +which he sent to Mahmud of Ghazni and Masud of +Lahore. The learned Avicenna had been invited to +join the same embassy, but had declined. Al Birúni +must have acquired a complete knowledge of Sanskrit, +for he not only translated one work on the Sânkhya, +and another on the Yoga philosophy, from Sanskrit +into Arabic, but likewise two works from Arabic into +Sanskrit.<note place='foot'>Elliot's Historians of India, p. 96. Al Birúni knew the +Harivanśa, and fixes the date of the five Siddhântas. The great value of Al Birúni's +work was first pointed out by M. Reinaud, in his excellent <q>Mémoire sur +l'Inde,</q> Paris, 1849.</note> +</p> + +<p> +About 1150 we hear of Abu Saleh translating a +work on the education of kings from Sanskrit into +Arabic.<note place='foot'>In the Persian work Mujmalu-t-Tawárikh, there are chapters +translated from the Arabic of Abu Saleh ben Shib ben Jawa, who had himself +abridged them, a hundred years before, from a Sanskrit work, called +<q>Instruction of Kings</q> (Râjanîti?). The Persian translator lived about +1150. See Elliot, l. c.</note> +</p> + +<p> +Two hundred years later, we are told that Firoz +Shah, after the capture of Nagarcote, ordered several +Sanskrit works on philosophy to be translated from +Sanskrit by Maulána Izzu-d-din Khalid Khani. A +work on veterinary medicine ascribed to Sálotar,<note place='foot'>Sâlotar +is not known as the author of such a work. Śâlotarîya occurs +instead of Śâlâturîya, in Rája Rádhakant; but Śâlâturîya is a name of +Pâņini, and the teacher of Suśruta is said to have been Divodâsa. An +Arabic translation of a Sanskrit work on veterinary medicine by Châņakya +is mentioned by Háji Chalfa, v. p. 59. A translation of the Charaka from +Sanskrit into Persian, and from Persian into Arabic, is mentioned in the +Fihrist, finished 987 <hi rend='smallcaps'>a. d.</hi></note> said +<pb n='151'/><anchor id='Pg151'/> +to have been the tutor of Suśruta, was likewise translated +from Sanskrit in the year 1381. A copy of it +was preserved in the Royal Library of Lucknow. +</p> + +<p> +Two hundred years more bring us to the reign +of Akbar (1556-1605). A more extraordinary man +never sat on the throne of India. Brought up as a +Muhammedan, he discarded the religion of the Prophet +as superstitious,<note place='foot'>See Vans Kennedy, +<q>Notice respecting the Religion introduced by +Akbar:</q> Transactions of the Literary Society of Bombay: London, 1820, +vol. ii. pp. 242-270.</note> and then devoted himself to a search +after the true religion. He called Brahmans and fire-worshippers +to his court, and ordered them to discuss +in his presence the merits of their religions with the +Muhammedan doctors. When he heard of the Jesuits +at Goa, he invited them to his capital, and he was for +many years looked upon as a secret convert to Christianity. +He was, however, a rationalist and deist, and +never believed anything, as he declared himself, that +he could not understand. The religion which he founded, +the so-called Ilahi religion, was pure Deism mixed +up with the worship of the sun<note place='foot'>Elliot, +Historians of India, p. 249.</note> as the purest and +highest emblem of the Deity. Though Akbar himself +could neither read nor write,<note place='foot'>Müllbauer, +Geschichte der Katholischen Missionen Ostindiens, p. 134.</note> his court was the home +of literary men of all persuasions. Whatever book, in +any language, promised to throw light on the problems +nearest to the emperor's heart, he ordered to be translated +into Persian. The New Testament<note place='foot'>Elliot, +Historians of India, p. 248.</note> was thus +translated at his command; so were the Mahâbhârata, +the Râmâyaņa, the Amarakosha,<note place='foot'>Ibid. pp. +259, 260. The Tarikh-i-Badauni, or Muntakhabu-t-Tawárikh, +written by Mulla Abdu-l-Kádir Maluk, Shah of Badáún, and finished in +1595, is a general history of India from the time of the Ghaznevides to the +40th year of Akbar. The author is a bigoted Muhammedan and judges +Akbar severely, though he was himself under great obligations to him. +He was employed by Akbar to translate from Arabic and Sanskrit into +Persian: he translated the Râmâyaņa, two out of the eighteen sections of +the Mahâbhârata, and abridged a history of Cashmir. These translations +were made under the superintendence of Faizi, the brother of the minister +Abu-l-Fazl. <q>Abulfacel, ministro de Akbar, sevalió del Amarasinha y del +Mahabhárata, que traduxo en persiano el año de +1586.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Hervas</hi>, ii. 136.</note> and other classical +<pb n='152'/><anchor id='Pg152'/> +works of Sanskrit literature. But though the emperor +set the greatest value on the sacred writings of different +nations, he does not seem to have succeeded in extorting +from the Brahmans a translation of the Veda. +A translation of the Atharva-veda<note place='foot'>See +M. M.'s History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 327.</note> was made for him +by Haji Ibrahim Sirhindi; but that Veda never enjoyed +the same authority as the other three Vedas; +and it is doubtful even whether by Atharva-veda is +meant more than the Upanishads, some of which may +have been composed for the special benefit of Akbar. +There is a story which, though evidently of a legendary +character, shows how the study of Sanskrit was +kept up by the Brahmans during the reign of the Mogul +emperors. +</p> + +<p> +<q>Neither the authority (it is said) nor promises of +Akbar could prevail upon the Brahmans to disclose +the tenets of their religion: he was therefore obliged to +have recourse to artifice. The stratagem he made use +of was to cause an infant, of the name of <emph>Feizi</emph>, to be +committed to the care of these priests, as a poor orphan +of the sacerdotal line, who alone could be initiated into +the sacred rites of their theology. Feizi, having received +the proper instructions for the part he was to +act, was conveyed privately to Benares, the seat of +knowledge in Hindostan; he was received into the +<pb n='153'/><anchor id='Pg153'/> +house of a learned Brahman, who educated him with +the same care as if he had been his son. After the +youth had spent ten years in study, Akbar was desirous +of recalling him; but he was struck with the charms +of the daughter of his preceptor. The old Brahman +laid no restraint on the growing passion of the two +lovers. He was fond of Feizi, and offered him his +daughter in marriage. The young man, divided between +love and gratitude, resolved to conceal the fraud +no longer, and, falling at the feet of the Brahman, +discovered the imposture, and asked pardon for his offences. +The priest, without reproaching him, seized a +poniard which hung at his girdle, and was going to +plunge it in his heart, if Feizi had not prevented him +by taking hold of his arm. The young man used every +means to pacify him, and declared himself ready to do +anything to expiate his treachery. The Brahman, +bursting into tears, promised to pardon him on condition +that he should swear never to translate the <emph>Vedas</emph>, +or sacred volumes, or disclose to any person whatever +the symbol of the Brahman creed. Feizi readily promised +him: how far he kept his word is not known; +but the sacred books of the Indians have never been +translated.</q><note place='foot'>History of +the Settlements of the Europeans in the East and West Indies, +translated from the French of the Abbé Bernal by J. Justamond: +Dublin, 1776, vol. i. p. 34.</note> +</p> + +<p> +We have thus traced the existence of Sanskrit, as the +language of literature and religion of India, from the +time of Alexander to the reign of Akbar. A hundred +years after Akbar, the eldest son of Shah Jehan, the +unfortunate Dárá, manifested the same interest in religious +speculations which had distinguished his great +<pb n='154'/><anchor id='Pg154'/> +grandsire. He became a student of Sanskrit, and +translated the Upanishads, philosophical treatises appended +to the Vedas, into Persian. This was in the +year 1657, a year before he was put to death by +his younger brother, the bigoted Aurengzebe. This +prince's translation was translated into French by Anquetil +Duperron, in the year 1795, the fourth year of +the French Republic; and was for a long time the +principal source from which European scholars derived +their knowledge of the sacred literature of the +Brahmans. +</p> + +<p> +At the time at which we have now arrived, the +reign of Aurengzebe (1658-1707), the cotemporary +and rival of Louis XIV., the existence of Sanskrit and +Sanskrit literature was known, if not in Europe generally, +at least to Europeans in India, particularly to +missionaries. Who was the first European, that knew +of Sanskrit, or that acquired a knowledge of Sanskrit, +is difficult to say. When Vasco de Gama landed at +Calicut, on the 9th of May, 1498, Padre Pedro began +at once to preach to the natives, and had suffered a +martyr's death before the discoverer of India returned +to Lisbon. Every new ship that reached India brought +new missionaries; but for a long time we look in vain +in their letters and reports for any mention of Sanskrit +or Sanskrit literature. Francis, now St. Francis Xavier, +was the first to organize the great work of preaching +the Gospel in India (1542); and such were his zeal +and devotion, such his success in winning the hearts of +high and low, that his friends ascribed to him, among +other miraculous gifts, the gift of tongues<note place='foot'>Müllbauer, +p. 67.</note>—a gift +never claimed by St. Francis himself. It is not, however, +<pb n='155'/><anchor id='Pg155'/> +till the year 1559 that we first hear of the missionaries +at Goa studying, with the help of a converted +Brahman,<note place='foot'>Ibid. p. 80. These Brahmans, according to Robert de Nobili, +were of a lower class, not initiated in the sacred literature. They were ignorant, +he says, <q>of the books Smarta, Apostamba, and +Sutra.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Müllbauer</hi>, p. +188. Robert himself quotes from the Âpastamba-Sûtra, in his defence, +ibid. p. 192. He also quotes Scanda Purâna, p. 193; Kadambari, p. 193.</note> +the theological and philosophical literature +of the country, and challenging the Brahmans to public +disputations. +</p> + +<p> +The first certain instance of a European missionary +having mastered the difficulties of the Sanskrit language, +belongs to a still later period,—to what may +be called the period of Roberto de Nobili, as distinguished +from the first period, which is under the presiding +spirit of Francis Xavier. Roberto de Nobili +went to India in 1606. He was himself a man of +high family, of a refined and cultivated mind, and he +perceived the more quickly the difficulties which kept +the higher castes, and particularly the Brahmans, from +joining the Christian communities formed at Madura +and other places. These communities consisted chiefly +of men of low rank, of no education, and no refinement. +He conceived the bold plan of presenting himself as a +Brahman, and thus obtaining access to the high and +noble, the wise and learned, in the land. He shut himself +up for years, acquiring in secret a knowledge, not +only of Tamil and Telugu, but of Sanskrit. When, after +a patient study of the language and literature of the +Brahmans, he felt himself strong enough to grapple with +his antagonists, he showed himself in public, dressed in +the proper garb of the Brahmans, wearing their cord +and their frontal mark, observing their diet, and submitting +even to the complicated rules of caste. He +<pb n='156'/><anchor id='Pg156'/> +was successful, in spite of the persecutions both of the +Brahmans, who were afraid of him, and of his own +fellow-laborers, who could not understand his policy. +His life in India, where he died as an old blind man, +is full of interest to the missionary. I can only speak +of him here as the first European Sanskrit scholar. A +man who could quote from Manu, from the Purâņas, +and even from works such as the Âpastamba-sûtras, +which are known even at present to only those few +Sanskrit scholars who can read Sanskrit MSS., must +have been far advanced in a knowledge of the sacred +language and literature of the Brahmans; and the +very idea that he came, as he said, to preach a new +or a fourth Veda,<note place='foot'><hi rend='italic'>The Ezour-Veda</hi> +is not the work of Robert de Nobili. It was probably +written by one of his converts. It is in Sanskrit verse, in the style of the +Pûraņas, and contains a wild mixture of Hindu and Christian doctrine. +The French translation was sent to Voltaire and printed by him in 1778, +<q>L'Ezour Vedam traduit du Sanscritam par un Brame.</q> Voltaire expressed +his belief that the original was four centuries older than Alexander, +and that it was the most precious gift for which the West had been +ever indebted to the East. Mr. Ellis discovered the Sanskrit original at +Pondichery. (Asiatic Researches, vol. xiv.) There is no evidence for +ascribing the work to Robert, and it is not mentioned in the list of his +works. (Bertrand, la Mission du Maduré, Paris, 1847-50, t. iii. p. 116; +Müllbauer, p. 205, <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.)</note> which had been lost, shows how +well he knew the strong and weak points of the theological +system which he came to conquer. It is surprising +that the reports which he sent to Rome, in +order to defend himself against the charge of idolatry, +and in which he drew a faithful picture of the religion, +the customs, and literature of the Brahmans, should +not have attracted the attention of scholars. The +<q>Accommodation Question,</q> as it was called, occupied +cardinals and popes for many years; but not one +of them seems to have perceived the extraordinary +<pb n='157'/><anchor id='Pg157'/> +interest attaching to the existence of an ancient civilization +so perfect and so firmly rooted as to require +accommodation even from the missionaries of Rome. +At a time when the discovery of one Greek MS. would +have been hailed by all the scholars of Europe, the +discovery of a complete literature was allowed to pass +unnoticed. The day of Sanskrit had not yet come. +</p> + +<p> +The first missionaries who succeeded in rousing the +attention of European scholars to the extraordinary +discovery that had been made were the French Jesuit +missionaries, whom Louis XIV. had sent out to India +after the treaty of Ryswick, in 1697.<note place='foot'>In 1677 +a Mr. Marshall is said to have been a proficient in Sanskrit. +Elliot's Historians of India, p. 265.</note> Father Pons +drew up a comprehensive account of the literary treasures +of the Brahmans; and his report, dated Karikal +(dans le Maduré), November 23, 1740, and addressed +to Father Duhalde, was published in the <q>Lettres +édifiantes.</q><note place='foot'>See an excellent +account of this letter in an article of M. Biot in the +<q>Journal des Savants,</q> 1861.</note> +Father Pons gives in it a most interesting +and, in general, a very accurate description of the +various branches of Sanskrit literature,—of the four +Vedas, the grammatical treatises, the six systems of +philosophy, and the astronomy of the Hindus. He +anticipated, on several points, the researches of Sir +William Jones. +</p> + +<p> +But, although the letter of Father Pons excited a +deep interest, that interest remained necessarily barren, +as long as there were no grammars, dictionaries, and +Sanskrit texts to enable scholars in Europe to study +Sanskrit in the same spirit in which they studied Greek +and Latin. The first who endeavored to supply this +want was a Carmelite friar, a German of the name +<pb n='158'/><anchor id='Pg158'/> +of Johann Philip Wesdin, better known as Paulinus +a Santo Bartholomeo. He was in India from 1776 to +1789; and he published the first grammar of Sanskrit +at Rome, in 1790. Although this grammar has been +severely criticised, and is now hardly ever consulted, it +is but fair to bear in mind that the first grammar of +any language is a work of infinitely greater difficulty +than any later grammar.<note place='foot'>Sidharubam +seu Grammatica Samscrdamica, cui accedit dissertatio +historico-critica in linguam Samscrdamicam, vulgo Samscret dictam, in +qua hujus linguæ existentia, origo, præstantia, antiquitas, extensio, maternitas +ostenditur, libri aliqui in ea exarati critice recensentur, et simul aliquæ +antiquissimæ gentilium orationes liturgicæ paucis attinguntur et +explicantur autore Paulino a S. Bartholomæo. Romæ, 1790.</note> +</p> + +<p> +We have thus seen how the existence of the Sanskrit +language and literature was known ever since India +had first been discovered by Alexander and his companions. +But what was not known was, that this language, +as it was spoken at the time of Alexander, and +at the time of Solomon, and for centuries before his +time, was intimately related to Greek and Latin, in +fact, stood to them in the same relation as French +to Italian and Spanish. The history of what may be +called European Sanskrit philology dates from the +foundation of the Asiatic Society at Calcutta, in 1784.<note place='foot'>The +earliest publications were the <q>Bhagavadgîta,</q> translated by Wilkins, +1785; the <q>Hitopadeśa,</q> translated by Wilkins, 1787; and the <q>Sakuntalâ,</q> +translated by W. Jones, 1789. Original grammars, without +mentioning mere compilations, were published by Colebrooke, 1805; by +Carey, 1806; by Wilkins, 1808; by Forster, 1810; by Yates, 1820; by Wilson, +1841. In Germany, Bopp published his grammars in 1827, 1832, 1834; +Benfey, in 1852 and 1855.</note> +It was through the labors of Sir William Jones, Carey, +Wilkins, Forster, Colebrooke, and other members of +that illustrious Society, that the language and literature +of the Brahmans became first accessible to European +<pb n='159'/><anchor id='Pg159'/> +scholars; and it would be difficult to say which of +the two, the language or the literature, excited the +deepest and most lasting interest. It was impossible to +look, even in the most cursory manner, at the declensions +and conjugations, without being struck by the +extraordinary similarity, or, in some cases, by the absolute +identity of the grammatical forms in Sanskrit, +Greek, and Latin. As early as 1778, Halhed remarked, +in the preface to his Grammar of Bengalí,<note place='foot'>Halhed +had published in 1776 the <q>Code of Gentoo Laws,</q> a digest of +the most important Sanskrit law-books made by eleven Brahmans, by the +order of Warren Hastings.</note> +<q>I have been astonished to find this similitude of Sanskrit +words with those of Persian and Arabic, and even +of Latin and Greek; and these not in technical and +metaphorical terms, which the mutuation of refined arts +and improved manners might have occasionally introduced; +but in the main groundwork of language, in +monosyllables, in the names of numbers, and the appellations +of such things as could be first discriminated +on the immediate dawn of civilization.</q> Sir William +Jones (died 1794), after the first glance at Sanskrit, +declared that whatever its antiquity, it was a language +of most wonderful structure, more perfect than the +Greek, more copious than the Latin, and more exquisitely +refined than either, yet bearing to both of them +a strong affinity. <q>No philologer,</q> he writes, <q>could +examine the Sanskrit, Greek, and Latin, without believing +them to have sprung from some common source, +which, perhaps, no longer exists. There is a similar reason, +though not quite so forcible, for supposing that both +the Gothic and Celtic had the same origin with the Sanskrit. +The old Persian may be added to the same family.</q> +</p> + +<pb n='160'/><anchor id='Pg160'/> + +<p> +But how was that affinity to be explained? People +were completely taken by surprise. Theologians shook +their heads; classical scholars looked sceptical; philosophers +indulged in the wildest conjectures in order to +escape from the only possible conclusion which could +be drawn from the facts placed before them, but which +threatened to upset their little systems of the history of +the world. Lord Monboddo had just finished his great +work<note place='foot'><q>On the Origin and Progress +of Language,</q> second edition, Edinburgh, +1774. 6 vols.</note> in which he derives all mankind from a couple +of apes, and all the dialects of the world from a language +originally framed by some Egyptian gods,<note place='foot'><q>I +have supposed that language could not be invented without supernatural +assistance, and, accordingly, I have maintained that it was the invention +of the Dæmon kings of Egypt, who, being more than men, first +taught themselves to articulate, and then taught others. But, even among +them, I am persuaded there was a progress in the art, and that such a language +as the Shanskrit was not at once invented.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Monboddo, Antient +Metaphysics</hi>, vol. iv. p. 357.</note> when +the discovery of Sanskrit came on him like a thunder-bolt. +It must be said, however, to his credit, that he +at once perceived the immense importance of the discovery. +He could not be expected to sacrifice his primæval +monkeys or his Egyptian idols; but, with that +reservation, the conclusions which he drew from the +new evidence placed before him by his friend Mr. Wilkins, +the author of one of our first Sanskrit grammars, +are highly creditable to the acuteness of the Scotch judge. +<q>There is a language,</q> he writes<note place='foot'>Origin +and Progress of Language, vol. vi. p. 97.</note> (in 1792), <q>still +existing, and preserved among the Bramins of India, +which is a richer and in every respect a finer language +than even the Greek of Homer. All the other languages +of India have a great resemblance to this language, +<pb n='161'/><anchor id='Pg161'/> +which is called the Shanscrit. But those languages +are dialects of it, and formed from it, not the +Shanscrit from them. Of this, and other particulars +concerning this language, I have got such certain information +from India, that if I live to finish my history +of man, which I have begun in my third volume of +<q>Antient Metaphysics,</q> I shall be able clearly to prove +that the Greek is derived from the Shanscrit, which +was the antient language of Egypt, and was carried by +the Egyptians into India, with their other arts, and into +Greece by the colonies which they settled there.</q> +</p> + +<p> +A few years later (1795) he had arrived at more +definite views on the relation of Sanskrit to Greek; +and he writes,<note place='foot'>Antient Metaphysics, +vol. iv. p. 322.</note> <q>Mr. Wilkins has proved to my conviction +such a resemblance betwixt the Greek and the +Shanscrit, that the one must be a dialect of the other, +or both of some original language. Now the Greek +is certainly not a dialect of the Shanscrit, any more +than the Shanscrit is of the Greek. They must, +therefore, be both dialects of the same language; and +that language could be no other than the language +of Egypt, brought into India by Osiris, of which, undoubtedly, +the Greek was a dialect, as I think I have +proved.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Into these theories of Lord Monboddo's on Egypt +and Osiris, we need not inquire at present. But it +may be of interest to give one other extract, in +order to show how well, apart from his men with, +and his monkeys without, tails, Lord Monboddo could +sift and handle the evidence that was placed before +him:— +</p> + +<p> +<q>To apply these observations to the similarities which +<pb n='162'/><anchor id='Pg162'/> +Mr. Wilkins has discovered betwixt the Shanscrit and +the Greek;—I will begin with these words, which must +have been original words in all languages, as the things +denoted by them must have been known in the first +ages of civility, and have got names; so that it is impossible +that one language could have borrowed them +from another, unless it was a derivative or dialect of +that language. Of this kind are the names of numbers, +of the members of the human body, and of relations, +such as that of father, mother, and brother. And first, +as to numbers, the use of which must have been coeval +with civil society. The words in the Shanscrit for the +numbers from one to ten are, <emph>ek</emph>, <emph>dwee</emph>, +<emph>tree</emph>, <emph>chatoor</emph>, +<emph>panch</emph>, <emph>shat</emph>, <emph>sapt</emph>, +<emph>aght</emph>, <emph>nava</emph>, <emph>das</emph>, which certainly have +an affinity to the Greek or Latin names for those numbers. +Then they proceed towards twenty, saying ten +and one, ten and two, and so forth, till they come to +twenty; for their arithmetic is decimal as well as ours. +Twenty they express by the word <emph>veensatee</emph>. Then +they go on till they come to thirty, which they express +by the word <emph>treensat</emph>, of which the word expressing +three is part of the composition, as well as it is of the +Greek and Latin names for those numbers. And in +like manner they go on expressing forty, fifty, &c., by +a like composition with the words expressing simple +numerals, namely, four, five, &c., till they come to the +number one hundred, which they express by <emph>sat</emph>, a +word different from either the Greek or Latin name for +that number. But, in this numeration, there is a very +remarkable conformity betwixt the word in Shanscrit +expressing twenty or twice ten, and the words in Greek +and Latin expressing the same number; for in none of +the three languages has the word any relation to the +<pb n='163'/><anchor id='Pg163'/> +number two, which, by multiplying ten, makes twenty; +such as the words expressing the numbers thirty, forty, +&c., have to the words expressing three or four; for in +Greek the word is <emph>eikosi</emph>, which expresses no relation +to the number two; nor does the Latin <emph>viginti</emph>, but +which appears to have more resemblance to the Shanscrit +word <emph>veensatee</emph>. And thus it appears that in the +anomalies of the two languages of Greek and Latin, +there appears to be some conformity with the Shanscrit.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Lord Monboddo compares the Sanskrit <emph>pada</emph> with +the Greek <emph>pous</emph>, <emph>podos</emph>; the Sanskrit <emph>nâsa</emph> with the +Latin <emph>nasus</emph>; the Sanskrit <emph>deva</emph>, god, with the Greek +<emph>Theos</emph> and Latin <emph>deus</emph>; the Sanskrit <emph>ap</emph>, water, with +the Latin <emph>aqua</emph>; the Sanskrit <emph>vidhavâ</emph> with the Latin +<emph>vidua</emph>, widow. Sanskrit words such as <emph>gonia</emph>, for +angle, <emph>kentra</emph>, for centre, <emph>hora</emph>, for hour, he points out +as clearly of Greek origin, and imported into Sanskrit. +He then proceeds to show the grammatical +coincidences between Sanskrit and the classical languages. +He dwells on compounds such as <emph>tripada</emph>, +from <emph>tri</emph>, three, and <emph>pada</emph>, foot—a tripod; he remarks +on the extraordinary fact that Sanskrit, like Greek, +changes a positive into a negative adjective by the addition +of the <emph>a</emph> privative; and he then produces what +he seems to consider as the most valuable present that +Mr. Wilkins could have given him, namely, the Sanskrit +forms, <emph>asmi</emph>, I am; <emph>asi</emph>, thou art; <emph>asti</emph>, he is; +<emph>santi</emph>, they are; forms clearly of the same origin as +the corresponding forms, <emph>esmi</emph>, <emph>eis</emph>, <emph>esti</emph>, in +Greek, and <emph>sunt</emph> in Latin. +</p> + +<p> +Another Scotch philosopher, Dugald Stewart, was +much less inclined to yield such ready submission. +<pb n='164'/><anchor id='Pg164'/> +No doubt it must have required a considerable effort +for a man brought up in the belief that Greek and +Latin were either aboriginal languages, or modifications +of Hebrew, to bring himself to acquiesce in the +revolutionary doctrine that the classical languages were +intimately related to a jargon of mere savages; for +such all the subjects of the Great Mogul were then +supposed to be. However, if the facts about Sanskrit +were true, Dugald Stewart was too wise not to see +that the conclusions drawn from them were inevitable. +He therefore denied the reality of such a language +as Sanskrit altogether, and wrote his famous essay to +prove that Sanskrit had been put together, after the +model of Greek and Latin, by those arch-forgers and +liars the Brahmans, and that the whole of Sanskrit +literature was an imposition. I mention this fact, because +it shows, better than anything else, how violent +a shock was given by the discovery of Sanskrit to prejudices +most deeply ingrained in the mind of every +educated man. The most absurd arguments found +favor for a time, if they could only furnish a loophole +by which to escape from the unpleasant conclusion that +Greek and Latin were of the same kith and kin as the +language of the black inhabitants of India. The first +who dared boldly to face both the facts and the conclusions +of Sanskrit scholarship was the German poet, +Frederick Schlegel. He had been in England during +the peace of Amiens (1801-1802), and had learned +a smattering of Sanskrit from Mr. Alexander Hamilton. +After carrying on his studies for some time at +Paris, he published, in 1808, his work, <q>On the +Language and Wisdom of the Indians.</q> This work +became the foundation of the science of language. +<pb n='165'/><anchor id='Pg165'/> +Though published only two years after the first volume +of Adelung's <q>Mithridates,</q> it is separated from +that work by the same distance which separates the +Copernican from the Ptolemæan system. Schlegel +was not a great scholar. Many of his statements +have proved erroneous; and nothing would be easier +than to dissect his essay and hold it up to ridicule. +But Schlegel was a man of genius; and when a new +science is to be created, the imagination of the poet is +wanted, even more than the accuracy of the scholar. +It surely required somewhat of poetic vision to embrace +with <emph>one</emph> glance the languages of India, Persia, +Greece, Italy, and Germany, and to rivet them together +by the simple name of Indo-Germanic. This +was Schlegel's work; and in the history of the intellect, +it has truly been called <q>the discovery of a new +world.</q> +</p> + +<p> +We shall see, in our next lecture, how Schlegel's +idea was taken up in Germany, and how it led almost +immediately to a genealogical classification of the principal +languages of mankind. +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='166'/><anchor id='Pg166'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Lecture V. Genealogical Classification Of Languages.</head> + +<p> +We traced, in our last Lecture, the history of the +various attempts at a classification of languages to the +year 1808, the year in which Frederick Schlegel published +his little work on <q>The Language and Wisdom +of the Indians.</q> This work was like the wand of a +magician. It pointed out the place where a mine +should be opened; and it was not long before some +of the most distinguished scholars of the day began to +sink their shafts, and raise the ore. For a time, everybody +who wished to learn Sanskrit had to come to +England. Bopp, Schlegel, Lassen, Rosen, Burnouf, +all spent some time in this country, copying manuscripts +at the East-India House, and receiving assistance +from Wilkins, Colebrooke, Wilson, and other distinguished +members of the old Indian Civil Service. +The first minute and scholar-like comparison of the +grammar of Sanskrit with that of Greek and Latin, +Persian, and German, was made by Francis Bopp, in +1816.<note place='foot'>Conjugationssystem: Frankfurt, +1816.</note> Other essays of his followed; and in 1833 +appeared the first volume of his <q>Comparative Grammar +of Sanskrit, Zend, Greek, Latin, Lithuanian, +Slavonic, Gothic, and German.</q> This work was not +finished till nearly twenty years later, in +1852;<note place='foot'>New edition in 1856, much improved.</note> but it +<pb n='167'/><anchor id='Pg167'/> +will form forever the safe and solid foundation of comparative +philology. August Wilhelm von Schlegel, +the brother of Frederick Schlegel, used the influence +which he had acquired as a German poet, to popularize +the study of Sanskrit in Germany. His <q>Indische +Bibliothek</q> was published from 1819 to 1830, and +though chiefly intended for Sanskrit literature, it likewise +contained several articles on Comparative Philology. +This new science soon found a still more +powerful patron in William von Humboldt, the worthy +brother of Alexander von Humboldt, and at that time +one of the leading statesmen in Prussia. His essays, +chiefly on the philosophy of language, attracted general +attention during his lifetime; and he left a lasting +monument of his studies in his great work on the +Kawi language, which was published after his death, +in 1836. Another scholar who must be reckoned +among the founders of Comparative Philology is Professor +Pott, whose <q>Etymological Researches</q> appeared +first in 1833 and 1836.<note place='foot'>Second +edition, 1859 and 1861. Pott's work on the Language of the +Gipsies, 1846; his work on Proper Names, 1856.</note> More special in its +purpose, but based on the same general principles, was +Grimm's <q>Teutonic Grammar,</q> a work which has +truly been called colossal. Its publication occupied +nearly twenty years, from 1819 to 1837. We ought, +likewise, to mention here the name of an eminent Dane, +Erasmus Rask, who devoted himself to the study of the +northern languages of Europe. He started, in 1816, for +Persia and India, and was the first to acquire a knowledge +of Zend, the language of the Zend-Avesta; but he +died before he had time to publish all the results of his +learned researches. He had proved, however, that the +<pb n='168'/><anchor id='Pg168'/> +sacred language of the Parsis was closely connected +with the sacred language of the Brahmans, and that, +like Sanskrit, it had preserved some of the earliest formations +of Indo-European speech. These researches +into the ancient Persian language were taken up again +by one of the greatest scholars that France ever produced, +by Eugène Burnouf. Though the works of +Zoroaster had been translated before by Anquetil Duperron, +his was only a translation of a modern Persian +translation of the original. It was Burnouf who, by +means of his knowledge of Sanskrit and Comparative +Grammar, deciphered for the first time the very words +of the founder of the ancient religion of light. He +was, likewise, the first to apply the same key with +real success to the cuneiform inscriptions of Darius +and Xerxes; and his premature death will long be +mourned, not only by those who, like myself, had the +privilege of knowing him personally and attending his +lectures, but by all who have the interest of oriental +literature and of real oriental scholarship at heart. +</p> + +<p> +I cannot give here a list of all the scholars who +followed in the track of Bopp, Schlegel, Humboldt, +Grimm, and Burnouf. How the science of language +has flourished and abounded may best be seen in the +library of any comparative philologist. There has been +for the last ten years a special journal of Comparative +Philology in Germany. The Philological Society in +London publishes every year a valuable volume of its +transactions; and in almost every continental university +there is a professor of Sanskrit who lectures +likewise on Comparative Grammar and the science +of language. +</p> + +<p> +But why, it may naturally be asked, why should the +<pb n='169'/><anchor id='Pg169'/> +discovery of Sanskrit have wrought so complete a +change in the classificatory study of languages? If +Sanskrit had been the primitive language of mankind, +or at least the parent of Greek, Latin, and German, +we might understand that it should have led to quite a +new classification of these tongues. But Sanskrit does +not stand to Greek, Latin, the Teutonic, Celtic, and +Slavonic languages in the relation of Latin to French, +Italian, and Spanish. Sanskrit, as we saw before, +could not be called their parent, but only their elder +sister. It occupies with regard to the classical languages +a position analogous to that which Provençal +occupies with regard to the modern Romance dialects. +This is perfectly true; but it was exactly this necessity +of determining distinctly and accurately the mutual +relation of Sanskrit and the other members of the same +family of speech, which led to such important results, +and particularly to the establishment of the laws of phonetic +change as the only safe means for measuring the +various degrees of relationship of cognate dialects, and +thus restoring the genealogical tree of human speech. +When Sanskrit had once assumed its right position, +when people had once become familiarized with the +idea that there must have existed a language more +primitive than Greek, Latin, and Sanskrit, and forming +the common background of these three, as well as +of the Teutonic, Celtic, and Slavonic branches of +speech, all languages seemed to fall by themselves into +their right position. The key of the puzzle was found, +and all the rest was merely a work of patience. The +same arguments by which Sanskrit and Greek had +been proved to hold co-ordinate rank were perceived to +apply with equal strength to Latin and Greek; and +<pb n='170'/><anchor id='Pg170'/> +after Latin had once been shown to be more primitive +on many points than Greek, it was easy to see that the +Teutonic, the Celtic, and the Slavonic languages also, +contained each a number of formations which it was +impossible to derive from Sanskrit, Greek, or Latin. +It was perceived that all had to be treated as co-ordinate +members of one and the same class. +</p> + +<p> +The first great step in advance, therefore, which was +made in the classification of languages, chiefly through +the discovery of Sanskrit, was this, that scholars were +no longer satisfied with the idea of a general relationship, +but began to inquire for the different degrees of +relationship in which each member of a class stood to +another. Instead of mere <emph>classes</emph>, we hear now for the +first time of well regulated <emph>families</emph> of language. +</p> + +<p> +A second step in advance followed naturally from +the first. Whereas, for establishing in a general way +the common origin of certain languages, a comparison +of numerals, pronouns, prepositions, adverbs, and the +most essential nouns and verbs, had been sufficient, it +was soon found that a more accurate standard was +required for measuring the more minute degrees of +relationship. Such a standard was supplied by Comparative +Grammar; that is to say, by an intercomparison +of the grammatical forms of languages supposed to +be related to each other; such intercomparison being +carried out according to certain laws which regulate +the phonetic changes of letters. +</p> + +<p> +A glance at the modern history of language will +make this clearer. There could never be any doubt +that the so-called Romance languages, Italian, Wallachian, +Provençal, French, Spanish, and Portuguese, +were closely related to each other. Everybody could +<pb n='171'/><anchor id='Pg171'/> +see that they were all derived from Latin. But +one of the most distinguished French scholars, Raynouard, +who has done more for the history of the Romance +languages and literature than any one else, +maintained that Provençal only was the daughter of +Latin; whereas French, Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese +were the daughters of Provençal. He maintained +that Latin passed, from the seventh to the ninth +century, through an intermediate stage, which he called +Langue Romane, and which he endeavored to prove +was the same as the Provençal of Southern France, +the language of the Troubadours. According to him, +it was only after Latin had passed through this uniform +metamorphosis, represented by the Langue Romane or +Provençal, that it became broken up into the various +Romance dialects of Italy, France, Spain, and Portugal. +This theory, which was vigorously attacked by +August Wilhelm von Schlegel, and afterwards minutely +criticised by Sir Cornewall Lewis, can only be refuted +by a comparison of the Provençal grammar with that +of the other Romance dialects. And here, if you take +the auxiliary verb <emph>to be</emph>, and compare its forms in Provençal +and French, you will see at once that, on several +points, French has preserved the original Latin +forms in a more primitive state than Provençal, and +that, therefore, it is impossible to classify French as the +daughter of Provençal, and as the granddaughter of +Latin. We have in Provençal:— +</p> + +<lg> +<l><emph>sem</emph>, corresponding to the French <emph>nous sommes</emph>,</l> +<l><emph>etz</emph>, corresponding to the French <emph>vous êtes</emph>,</l> +<l><emph>son</emph>, corresponding to the French <emph>ils sont</emph>,</l> +</lg> + +<p> +and it would be a grammatical miracle if crippled +forms, such as <emph>sem</emph>, <emph>etz</emph>, and <emph>son</emph>, had been changed +<pb n='172'/><anchor id='Pg172'/> +back again into the more healthy, more primitive, +more Latin, <emph>sommes</emph>, <emph>êtes</emph>, <emph>sont</emph>; +<emph>sumus</emph>, <emph>estis</emph>, <emph>sunt</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +Let us apply the same test to Sanskrit, Greek, and +Latin; and we shall see how their mutual genealogical +position is equally determined by a comparison of +their grammatical forms. It is as impossible to derive +Latin from Greek, or Greek from Sanskrit, as it is to +treat French as a modification of Provençal. Keeping +to the auxiliary verb <emph>to be</emph>, we find that <emph>I am</emph> +is in +</p> + +<table rend="latexcolumns: 'p{2cm} p{2cm} p{2cm}'; tblcolumns: 'lw(15) lw(15) lw(15)'"> +<row><cell>Sanskrit</cell><cell>Greek</cell><cell>Lithuanian</cell></row> +<row><cell><emph>asmi</emph></cell><cell><emph>esmi</emph></cell> + <cell><emph>esmi</emph>.</cell></row> +</table> + +<p> +The root is <emph>as</emph>, the termination <emph>mi</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +Now, the termination of the second person is <emph>si</emph>, +which, together with <emph>as</emph>, or <emph>es</emph>, would make, +</p> + +<table rend="latexcolumns: 'p{2cm} p{2cm} p{2cm}'; tblcolumns: 'lw(15) lw(15) lw(15)'"> +<row><cell><emph>as-si</emph></cell><cell><emph>es-si</emph></cell> + <cell><emph>es-si</emph>.</cell></row> +</table> + +<p> +But here Sanskrit, as far back as its history can be +traced, has reduced <emph>assi</emph> to <emph>asi</emph>; and it would be impossible +to suppose that the perfect, or, as they are +sometimes called, organic, forms in Greek and Lithuanian, +<emph>es-si</emph>, could first have passed through the mutilated +state of the Sanskrit <emph>asi</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +The third person is the same in Sanskrit, Greek, +and Lithuanian, <emph>as-ti</emph> or <emph>es-ti</emph>; and, with the loss of +the final <emph>i</emph>, we recognize the Latin +<emph>est</emph>, Gothic <emph>ist</emph>, and +Russian <emph>est'</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +The same auxiliary verb can be made to furnish +sufficient proof that Latin never could have passed +through the Greek, or what used to be called the +Pelasgic stage, but that both are independent modifications +of the same original language. In the singular, +Latin is less primitive than Greek; for <emph>sum</emph> +stands for <emph>es-um</emph>, <emph>es</emph> for +<emph>es-is</emph>, <emph>est</emph> for <emph>es-ti</emph>. In the first +<pb n='173'/><anchor id='Pg173'/> +person plural, too, <emph>sumus</emph> stands for <emph>es-umus</emph>, the Greek +<emph>es-mes</emph>, the Sanskrit <emph>'smas</emph>. +The second person <emph>es-tis</emph>, +is equal to Greek <emph>es-te</emph>, and more primitive than Sanskrit +<emph>stha</emph>. But in the third person plural Latin is +more primitive than Greek. The regular form would +be <emph>as-anti</emph>; this, in Sanskrit, is changed into <emph>santi</emph>. In +Greek, the initial <emph>s</emph> is dropped, and the Æolic <emph>enti</emph>, is +finally reduced to <emph>eisi</emph>. The Latin, on the contrary, +has kept the radical <emph>s</emph>, and it would be perfectly +impossible to derive the Latin <emph>sunt</emph> from the Greek +<emph>eisi</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +I need hardly say that the modern English, <emph>I am</emph>, +<emph>thou art</emph>, <emph>he is</emph>, are only secondary modifications of the +same primitive verb. We find in Gothic— +</p> + +<lg> +<l><emph>im</emph> for <emph>ism</emph></l> +<l><emph>is</emph> for <emph>iss</emph></l> +<l><emph>ist</emph>.</l> +</lg> + +<p> +The Anglo-Saxon changes the <emph>s</emph> into <emph>r</emph>, thus giving— +</p> + +<lg> +<l><emph>eom</emph> for <emph>eorm</emph>, plural <emph>sind</emph> for <emph>isind</emph>.</l> +<l><emph>eart</emph> for <emph>ears</emph>, plural <emph>sind</emph></l> +<l><emph>is</emph> for <emph>ist</emph>, plural <emph>sind</emph></l> +</lg> + +<p> +By applying this test to all languages, the founders +of comparative philology soon reduced the principal +dialects of Europe and Asia to certain families, and +they were able in each family to distinguish different +branches, each consisting again of numerous dialects, +both ancient and modern. +</p> + +<p> +There are many languages, however, which as yet +have not been reduced to families, and though there +is no reason to doubt that some of them will hereafter +be comprehended in a system of genealogical +classification, it is right to guard from the beginning +<pb n='174'/><anchor id='Pg174'/> +against the common, but altogether gratuitous supposition, +that the principle of genealogical classification +must be applicable to all. Genealogical classification +is no doubt the most perfect of all classifications, but +there are but few branches of physical science in +which it can be carried out, except very partially. +In the science of language, genealogical classification +must rest chiefly on the formal or grammatical elements, +which, after they have been affected by phonetic +change, can be kept up only by a continuous +tradition. We know that French, Italian, Spanish, +and Portuguese must be derived from a common +source, because they share grammatical forms in common, +which none of these dialects could have supplied +from their own resources, and which have no meaning, +or, so to say, no life, in any one of them. The termination +of the imperfect <emph>ba</emph> in Spanish, <emph>va</emph> in Italian, by +which <emph>canto</emph>, I sing, is changed into +<emph>cantaba</emph> and <emph>cantava</emph>, +has no separate existence, and no independent +meaning in either of these modern dialects. It could +not have been formed with the materials supplied by +Spanish and Italian. It must have been handed +down from an earlier generation in which this <emph>ba</emph> +had a meaning. We trace it back to Latin <emph>bam</emph>, in +<emph>cantabam</emph>, and here it can be proved that <emph>bam</emph> was originally +an independent auxiliary verb, the same which +exists in Sanskrit <emph>bhavâmi</emph>, and in the Anglo-Saxon +<emph>beom</emph>, I am. Genealogical classification, therefore, +applies properly only to decaying languages, to languages +in which grammatical growth has been arrested, +through the influence of literary cultivation; in +which little new is added, everything old is retained +as long as possible, and where what we call growth +<pb n='175'/><anchor id='Pg175'/> +or history is nothing but the progress of phonetic corruption. +But before languages decay, they have passed +through a period of growth; and it seems to have been +completely overlooked, that dialects which diverged +during that early period, would naturally resist every +attempt at genealogical classification. If you remember +the manner in which, for instance, the plural was +formed in Chinese and other languages examined by +us in a former Lecture, you will see that where each +dialect may choose its own term expressive of plurality, +such as <emph>heap</emph>, <emph>class</emph>, <emph>kind</emph>, +<emph>flock</emph>, <emph>cloud</emph>, &c., it would be +unreasonable to expect similarity in grammatical terminations, +after these terms have been ground down +by phonetic corruption to mere exponents of plurality. +But, on the other hand, it would by no means follow +that therefore these languages had no common origin. +Languages may have a common origin, and yet the +words which they originally employed for marking +case, number, person, tense, and mood, having been +totally different, the grammatical terminations to which +these words would gradually dwindle down could not +possibly yield any results if submitted to the analysis +of comparative grammar. A genealogical classification +of such languages is, therefore, from the nature of the +case, simply impossible, at least, if such classification +is chiefly to be based on grammatical or formal +evidence. +</p> + +<p> +It might be supposed, however, that such languages, +though differing in their grammatical articulation, would +yet evince their common origin by the identity of their +radicals or roots. No doubt, they will in many instances. +They will probably have retained their numerals +in common, some of their pronouns, and some of the +commonest words of every-day life. But even here we +<pb n='176'/><anchor id='Pg176'/> +must not expect too much, nor be surprised if we find +even less than we expected. You remember how the +names for father varied in the numerous Friesian dialects. +Instead of <emph>frater</emph>, the Latin word for brother, +you find <emph>hermano</emph> in Spanish. Instead of <emph>ignis</emph>, the +Latin word for fire, you have in French <emph>feu</emph>, in Italian, +<emph>fuoco</emph>. Nobody would doubt the common origin of +German and English; yet the English numeral <q>the +first,</q> though preserved in <emph>Fürst</emph>, <emph>prïnceps</emph>, prince, +is quite different from the German <q>Der Erste;</q> +<q>the second</q> is quite different from <q>Der Zweite;</q> +and there is no connection between the possessive pronoun +<emph>its</emph>, and the German <emph>sein</emph>. This dialectical freedom +works on a much larger scale in ancient and illiterate +languages; and those who have most carefully +watched the natural growth of dialects will be the least +surprised that dialects which had the same origin should +differ, not only in their grammatical framework, but +likewise in many of those test-words which are very +properly used for discovering the relationship of literary +languages. How it is possible to say anything +about the relationship of such dialects we shall see +hereafter. For the present, it is sufficient if I have +made it clear why the principle of genealogical classification +is not of necessity applicable to all languages; +and secondly, why languages, though they cannot be +classified genealogically, need not therefore be supposed +to have been different from the beginning. The assertion +so frequently repeated that the impossibility of +classing all languages genealogically proves the impossibility +of a common origin of language, is nothing +but a kind of scientific dogmatism, which, more +than anything else, has impeded the free progress of +independent research. +</p> + +<pb n='177'/><anchor id='Pg177'/> + +<p> +But let us see now how far the genealogical classification +of languages has advanced, how many families +of human speech have been satisfactorily established. +Let us remember what suggested to us the necessity of +a genealogical classification. We wished to know the +original intention of certain words and grammatical +forms in English, and we saw that before we could +attempt to fathom the origin of such words as <q>I +love,</q> and <q>I loved,</q> we should have to trace them +back to their most primitive state. We likewise found, +by a reference to the history of the Romance dialects, +that words existing in one dialect had frequently been +preserved in a more primitive form in another, and that, +therefore, it was of the highest importance to bring ancient +languages into the same genealogical connection +by which French, Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese are +held together as the members of one family. +</p> + +<p> +Beginning, therefore, with the living language of +England, we traced it, without difficulty, to Anglo-Saxon. +This carries us back to the seventh century +after Christ, for it is to that date that Kemble and +Thorpe refer the ancient English epic, the Beowulf. +Beyond this we cannot go on English soil. But we +know that the Saxons, the Angles, and Jutes came +from the continent, and there their descendants, along +the northern coast of Germany, still speak <emph>Low-German</emph>, +or Nieder-Deutsch, which in the harbors of Antwerp, +Bremen, and Hamburg, has been mistaken by +many an English sailor for a corrupt English dialect. +The Low-German comprehends many dialects in the +north or the lowlands of Germany; but in Germany +proper they are hardly ever used for literary purposes. +The Friesian dialects are Low-German, so are the +<pb n='178'/><anchor id='Pg178'/> +Dutch and Flemish. The Friesian had a literature +of its own as early at least as the twelfth century, +if not earlier.<note place='foot'><q>Although the +Old Friesian documents rank, according to their dates, +with Middle rather than with Old German, the Friesian language appears +there in a much more ancient stage, which very nearly approaches the Old +High-German. The political isolation of the Friesians, and their noble attachment +to their traditional manners and rights, have imparted to their +language also a more conservative spirit. After the fourteenth century the +old inflections of the Friesian decay most rapidly, whereas in the twelfth and +thirteenth centuries they rival the Anglo-Saxon of the ninth and tenth +centuries.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Grimm</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>German Grammar</hi> +(1st ed.), vol. i p. lxviii.</note> The Dutch, which is still a national +and literary language, though confined to a small area, +can be traced back to literary documents of the sixteenth +century. The Flemish, too, was at that time +the language of the court of Flanders and Brabant, +but has since been considerably encroached upon, +though not yet extinguished, by the official languages +of the kingdoms of Holland and Belgium. The oldest +literary document of Low-German on the Continent is +the Christian epic, the <hi rend='italic'>Heljand</hi> (Heljand = Heiland, +the Healer or Saviour), which is preserved to us in +two MSS. of the ninth century, and was written at +that time for the benefit of the newly converted Saxons. +We have traces of a certain amount of literature +in Saxon or Low-German from that time onward +through the Middle Ages up to the seventeenth century. +But little only of that literature has been +preserved; and, after the translation of the Bible by +Luther into High-German, the fate of Low-German +literature was sealed. +</p> + +<p> +The literary language of Germany is, and has been +ever since the days of Charlemagne, the <emph>High-German</emph>. +It is spoken in various dialects all over Germany.<note place='foot'>The +dialects of Swabia (the Allemannish), of Bavaria and Austria, of +Franconia along the Main, and of Saxony, &c.</note> +<pb n='179'/><anchor id='Pg179'/> +Its history may be traced through three periods. +The present, or New High-German period dates from +Luther; the Middle High-German period extends +from Luther backwards to the twelfth century; the +Old High-German period extends from thence to the +seventh century. +</p> + +<p> +Thus we see that we can follow the High-German, +as well as the Low-German branch of Teutonic speech, +back to about the seventh century after Christ. We +must not suppose that before that time there was <emph>one</emph> +common Teutonic language spoken by all German +tribes, and that it afterwards diverged into two streams,—the +High and Low. There never was a common, +uniform, Teutonic language; nor is there any evidence +to show that there existed at any time a uniform High-German +or Low-German language, from which all +High-German and Low-German dialects are respectively +derived. We cannot derive Anglo-Saxon, Friesian, +Flemish, Dutch, and Platt-Deutsch from the ancient +Low-German, which is preserved in the continental +Saxon of the ninth century. All we can say is this, +that these various Low-German dialects in England, +Holland, Friesia, and Lower Germany, passed at different +times through the same stages, or, so to say, the +same latitudes of grammatical growth. We may add +that, with every century that we go back, the convergence +of these dialects becomes more and more decided; +but there is no evidence to justify us in admitting the +historical reality of <emph>one</emph> primitive and uniform Low-German +language from which they were all derived. This +is a mere creation of grammarians who cannot understand +a multiplicity of dialects without a common type. +They would likewise demand the admission of a primitive +<pb n='180'/><anchor id='Pg180'/> +High-German language, as the source, not only of +the literary Old, Middle, and Modern High-German, +but likewise of all the local dialects of Austria, Bavaria, +Swabia, and Franconia. And they would wish us +to believe that, previous to the separation into High +and Low German, there existed one complete Teutonic +language, as yet neither High nor Low, but containing +the germs of both. Such a system may be convenient +for the purposes of grammatical analysis, but it becomes +mischievous as soon as these grammatical abstractions +are invested with an historical reality. As there +were families, clans, confederacies, and tribes, before +there was a nation; so there were dialects before there +was a language. The grammarian who postulates an +historical reality for the one primitive type of Teutonic +speech, is no better than the historian who believes in +a <emph>Francus</emph>, the grandson of Hector, and the supposed +ancestor of all the Franks, or in a <emph>Brutus</emph>, the mythical +father of all the Britons. When the German races +descended, one after the other, from the Danube and +from the Baltic, to take possession of Italy and the +Roman provinces,—when the Goths, the Lombards, +the Vandals, the Franks, the Burgundians, each under +their own kings, and with their own laws and customs, +settled in Italy, Gaul, and Spain, to act their +several parts in the last scene of the Roman tragedy,—we +have no reason to suppose that they all spoke +one and the same dialect. If we possessed any literary +documents of those ancient German races, we +should find them all dialects again, some with the +peculiarities of High, others with those of Low, German. +Nor is this mere conjecture: for it so happens +that, by some fortunate accident, the dialect of one +<pb n='181'/><anchor id='Pg181'/> +at least of those ancient German races has been preserved +to us in the Gothic translation of the Bible by +Bishop Ulfilas. +</p> + +<p> +I must say a few words on this remarkable man. +The accounts of ecclesiastical historians with regard +to the date and the principal events in the life of +Ulfilas are very contradictory. This is partly owing +to the fact that Ulfilas was an Arian bishop, and that +the accounts which we possess of him come from two +opposite sides, from Arian and Athanasian writers. +Although in forming an estimate of his character it +would be necessary to sift this contradictory evidence, +it is but fair to suppose that, when dates and simple +facts in the life of the Bishop have to be settled, his +own friends had better means of information than the +orthodox historians. It is, therefore, from the writings +of his own co-religionists that the chronology and the +historical outline of the Bishop's life should be determined. +</p> + +<p> +The principal writers to be consulted are Philostorgius, +as preserved by Photius, and Auxentius, as +preserved by Maximinus in a MS. lately discovered +by Professor Waitz<note place='foot'>Über das Leben +und die Lehre des Ulfila, Hannover, 1840. Über +das Leben des Ulfila von Dr. Bessell, Göttingen, 1860.</note> +in the Library at Paris. (Supplement. +Latin. No. 594.) This MS. contains some +writings of Hilarius, the two first books of Ambrosius +De fide, and the acts of the Council of Aquileja (381). +On the margin of this MS. Maximinus repeated the +beginning of the acts of the Council of Aquileja, adding +remarks of his own in order to show how unfairly +Palladius had been treated in that council by Ambrose. +He jotted down his own views on the Arian +<pb n='182'/><anchor id='Pg182'/> +controversy, and on fol. 282, seq., he copied an account +of Ulfilas written by Auxentius, the bishop of +Dorostorum (Silistria on the Danube), a pupil of +Ulfilas. This is followed again by some dissertations +of Maximinus, and on foll. 314-327, a treatise addressed +to Ambrose by a Semi-arian, a follower of +Eusebius, possibly by Prudentius himself, was copied +and slightly abbreviated for his own purposes by +Maximinus. +</p> + +<p> +It is from Auxentius, as copied by Maximinus, that +we learn that Ulfilas died at Constantinople, where he +had been invited by the emperor to a disputation. +This could not have been later than the year 381, +because, according to the same Auxentius, Ulfilas had +been bishop for forty years, and, according to Philostorgius, +he had been consecrated by Eusebius. Now +Eusebius of Nicomedia died 341, and as Philostorgius +says that Ulfilas was consecrated by <q>Eusebius and +the bishops who were with him,</q> the consecration has +been referred with great plausibility to the beginning +of the year 341, when Eusebius presided at the Synod +of Antioch. As Ulfilas was thirty years old at the +time of his consecration, he must have been born in +311, and as he was seventy years of age when he died +at Constantinople, his death must have taken place in +381. +</p> + +<p> +Professor Waitz fixed the death of Ulfilas in 388, +because it is stated by Auxentius that other Arian +bishops had come with Ulfilas on his last journey to +Constantinople, and had actually obtained the promise +of a new council from the emperors, but that the +heretical party, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>, the Athanasians, succeeded in +getting a law published, prohibiting all disputation on +<pb n='183'/><anchor id='Pg183'/> +the faith, whether in public or private. Maximinus, +to whom we owe this notice, has added two laws from +the Codex Theodosianus, which he supposed to have +reference to this controversy, dated respectively 388 +and 386. This shows that Maximinus himself was +doubtful as to the exact date. Neither of these laws, +however, is applicable to the case, as has been fully +shown by Dr. Bessell. They are quotations from the +Codex Theodosianus made by Maximinus at his own +risk, and made in error. If the death of Ulfilas were +fixed in 388, the important notice of Philostorgius, +that Ulfilas was consecrated by Eusebius, would have +to be surrendered, and we should have to suppose that +as late as 388 Theodosius had been in treaty with the +Arians, whereas after the year 383, when the last +attempt at a reconciliation bad been made by Theodosius, +and had failed, no mercy was any longer shown +to the party of Ulfilas and his friends. +</p> + +<p> +If, on the contrary, Ulfilas died at Constantinople +in 381, he might well have been called there by the +Emperor Theodosius, not to a council, but to a disputation +(ad disputationem), as Dr. Bessell ingeniously +maintains, against the Psathyropolistæ,<note place='foot'>Bessell, +l. c. p. 38.</note> a new sect of +Arians at Constantinople. About the same time, in +380, Sozomen<note place='foot'>Sozomenus, H. E. +vii. 6.</note> refers to efforts made by the Arians to +gain influence with Theodosius. He mentions, like +Auxentius, that these efforts were defeated, and a law +published to forbid disputations on the nature of God. +This law exists in the Codex Theodosianus, and is +dated January 10, 381. But what is most important +is, that this law actually revokes a rescript that had +<pb n='184'/><anchor id='Pg184'/> +been obtained fraudulently by the Arian heretics, thus +confirming the statement of Auxentius that the emperor +had held out to him and his party a promise of +a new council. +</p> + +<p> +We now return to Ulfilas. He was born in 311. +His parents, as Philostorgius tells us, were of Cappadocian +origin, and had been carried away by the Goths +as captives from a place called Sadagolthina, near the +town of Parnassus. It was under Valerian and Gallienus +(about 267) that the Goths made this raid from +Europe to Asia, Galatia, and Cappadocia, and the +Christian captives whom they carried back to the +Danube were the first to spread the light of the Gospel +among the Goths. Philostorgius was himself a +Cappadocian, and there is no reason to doubt this +statement of his on the parentage of Ulfilas. Ulfilas +was born among the Goths; Gothic was his native +language, though he was able in after-life to speak and +write both in Latin and Greek. Philostorgius, after +speaking of the death of Crispus (326), and before +proceeding to the last years of Constantine, says, that +<q>about that time</q> Ulfilas led his Goths from beyond +the Danube into the Roman empire. They had to +leave their country, being persecuted on account of +their Christianity. Ulfilas was the leader of the faithful +flock, and came to Constantine, (not Constantius,) +as ambassador. This must have been before 337, the +year of Constantine's death. It may have been in +328, when Constantine had gained a victory over the +Goths; and though Ulfilas was then only seventeen +years of age, this would be no reason for rejecting the +testimony of Philostorgius, who says that Constantine +treated Ulfilas with great respect, and called him the +<pb n='185'/><anchor id='Pg185'/> +Moses of his time. Having led his faithful flock +across the Danube into Mœsia, he might well have +been compared by the emperor to Moses leading the +Israelites from Egypt through the Red Sea. It is true +that Auxentius institutes the same comparison between +Ulfilas and Moses, after stating that Ulfilas had been +received with great honors by Constantius. But this +refers to what took place after Ulfilas had been for +seven years bishop among the Goths, in 348, and does +not invalidate the statement of Philostorgius as to the +earlier intercourse between Ulfilas and Constantine. +Sozomen (H. E. vi. 3, 7) clearly distinguishes between +the first crossing of the Danube by the Goths, +with Ulfilas as their ambassador, and the later attacks +of Athanarich on Fridigern or Fritiger, which led to +the settlement of the Goths in the Roman empire. We +must suppose that after having crossed the Danube, +Ulfilas remained for some time with his Goths, or at +Constantinople. Auxentius says that he officiated as +Lector, and it was only when he had reached the +requisite age of thirty, that he was made bishop by +Eusebius in 341. He passed the first seven years of +his episcopate among the Goths, and the remaining +thirty-three of his life <q>in solo Romaniæ,</q> where he +had migrated together with Fritiger and the Thervingi. +There is some confusion as to the exact date +of the Gothic Exodus, but it is not at all unlikely +that Ulfilas acted as their leader on more than one +occasion. +</p> + +<p> +There is little more to be learnt about Ulfilas from +other sources. What is said by ecclesiastical historians +about the motives of his adopting the doctrines of +Arius, and his changing from one side to the other, +<pb n='186'/><anchor id='Pg186'/> +deserves no credit. Ulfilas, according to his own confession, +was always an Arian (semper sic credidi). +Socrates says that Ulfilas was present at the Synod +of Constantinople in 360, which may be true, though +neither Auxentius nor Philostorgius mentions it. The +author of the Acts of Nicetas speaks of Ulfilas as +present at the Council of Nicæa, in company with +Theophilus. Theophilus, it is true, signed his name +as a Gothic bishop at that council, but there is nothing +to confirm the statement that Ulfilas, then fourteen +years of age, was with Theophilus. +</p> + +<p> +Ulfilas translated the whole Bible, except the Books +of Kings. For the Old Testament he used the Septuagint; +for the New, the Greek text; but not exactly +in that form in which we have it. Unfortunately, the +greater part of his work has been lost, and we have +only considerable portions of the Gospels, all the genuine +Epistles of St. Paul, though again not complete; +fragments of a Psalm, of Ezra, and Nehemiah.<note place='foot'><p>Auxentius +thus speaks of Ulfilas, (Waitz, p. 19:) <q rend='pre'>Et [ita prædic]-ante +et per Cristum cum dilectione Deo Patri gratias agente, hæc et his similia +exsequente, quadraginta annis in episcopatu gloriose florens, apostolica +gratia Græcam et Latinam et Goticam linguam sine intermissione in una +et sola eclesia Cristi predicavit.... Qui et ipsis tribus linguis plures +tractatus et multas interpretationes volentibus ad utilitatem et ad ædificationem, +sibi ad æternam memoriam et mercedem post se dereliquid. Quem +condigne laudare non sufficio et penitus tacere non audeo; cui plus omnium +ego sum debitor, quantum et amplius in me laboravit, qui me a prima etate +mea a parentibus meis discipulum suscepit et sacras litteras docuit et veritatem +manifestavit et per misericordiam Dei et gratiam Cristi et carnaliter +et spiritaliter ut filium suum in fide educavit.</q> +</p> +<p> +<q rend='pre'>Hic Dei providentia et Cristi misericordia propter multorum salutem in +gente Gothorum de lectore triginta annorum episkopus est ordinatus, ut +non solum esset heres Dei et coheres Cristi, sed et in hoc per gratiam Cristi +imitator Cristi et sanctorum ejus, ut quemadmodum sanctus David triginta +annorum rex et profeta est constitutus, ut regeret et doceret populum Dei +et filios Hisdrael, ita et iste beatus tamquam profeta est manifestatus et +sacerdos Cristi ordinatus, ut regeret et corrigeret et doceret et ædificaret +gentem Gothorum; quod et Deo volente et Cristo aucsiliante per ministerium +ipsius admirabiliter est adinpletum, et sicuti Josef in Ægypto triginta +annorum est manifes[tatus et] quemadmodum Dominus et Deus noster +Jhesus Cristus Filius Dei triginta annorum secundum carnem constitutus +et baptizatus, cœpit evangelium predicare et animas hominum pascere: ita +et iste sanctus, ipsius Cristi dispositione et ordinatione, et in fame et penuria +predicationis indifferenter agentem ipsam gentem Gothorum secundum +evangelicam et apostolicam et profeticam regulam emendavit et vibere +[Deo] docuit, et Cristianos, vere Cristianos esse, manifestavit et multiplicavit.</q> +</p> +<p> +<q>Ubi et ex invidia et operatione inimici thunc ab inreligioso et sacrilego +indice Gothorum tyrannico terrore in varbarico Cristianorum persecutio est +excitata, ut Satanas, qui male facere cupiebat, nolens faceret bene, ut quos +desiderabat prevaricatores facere et desertores, Cristo opitulante et propugnante, +fierent martyres et confessores, ut persecutor confunderetur, et +qui persecutionem patiebantur, coronarentur, ut hic, qui temtabat vincere, +victus erubesceret, et qui temtabantur, victores gauderent. Ubi et post +multorum servorum et ancillarum Cristi gloriosum martyrium, imminente +vehementer ipsa persecutione, conpletis septem annis tantummodo in episkopatum, +supradictus sanctissimus vir beatus Ulfila cum grandi populo +confessorum de varbarico pulsus, in solo Romanie a thu[n]c beate memorie +Constantio principe honorifice est susceptus, ut sicuti Deus per Moysem de +potentia et violentia Faraonis et Egyptorum po[pulum s]uum l[iberav]it +[et Rubrum] Mare transire fecit et sibi servire providit, ita et per sepe dictum +Deus confessores sancti Filii sui unigeniti de varbarico liberavit et per +Danubium transire fecit, et in montibus secundum sanctorum imitationem +sibi servire de[crevit] ..... eo populo in solo Romaniæ, ubi sine illis +septem annis, triginta et tribus annis veritatem predicavit, ut et in hoc +quorum sanctorum imitator erat [similis esset], quod quadraginta annorum +spatium et tempus ut multos ..... re et .... a[nn]orum ..... e +vita.</q> .. <q>Qu[i] c[um] precepto imperiali, conpletis quadraginta annis, +ad Constantinopolitanam urbem ad disputationem ..... contra p ... +ie ... p. t. stas perrexit, et eundo in .... nn .. ne. p ... ecias +sibi ax ..... to docerent et contestarent[ur] .... abat, et inge . e +.... supradictam [ci]vitatem, recogitato ei im .... de statu concilii, +ne arguerentur miseris miserabiliores, proprio judicio damnati et perpetuo +supplicio plectendi, statim cœpit infirmari; qua in infirmitate susceptus +est ad similitudine Elisei prophete. Considerare modo oportet meritum +viri, qui ad hoc duce Domino obit Constantinopolim, immo vero Cristianopolim, +ut sanctus et immaculatus sacerdos Cristi a sanctis et consacerdotibus, +a dignis dignus digne [per] tantum multitudinem Cristianorum pro +meritis [suis] mire et gloriose honoraretur.</q> +</p> +<p> +<q>Unde et cum sancto Hulfila ceterisque consortibus ad alium comitatum +Constantinopolim venissent, ibique etiam et imperatores adissent, adque +eis promissum fuisset conci[li]um, ut sanctus Aux[en]tius exposuit, +[a]gnita promiss[io]ne prefati pr[e]positi heretic[i] omnibus viribu[s] +institerunt u[t] lex daretur, qu[æ] concilium pro[hi]beret, sed nec p[ri]vatim +in domo [nec] in publico, vel i[n] quolibet loco di[s]putatio de fide +haberetur, sic[ut] textus indicat [le]gis, etc.</q> +</p></note> +</p> + +<pb n='187'/><anchor id='Pg187'/> + +<p> +Though Ulfilas belonged to the western Goths, his +translation was used by all Gothic tribes, when they +<pb n='188'/><anchor id='Pg188'/> +advanced into Spain and Italy. The Gothic language +died out in the ninth century, and after the extinction +of the great Gothic empires, the translation of Ulfilas +was lost and forgotten. But a MS. of the fifth century +had been preserved in the Abbey of Werden, and +towards the end of the sixteenth century, a man of the +name of Arnold Mercator, who was in the service of +William IV., the Landgrave of Hessia, drew attention +to this old parchment containing large fragments of the +translation of Ulfilas. The MS., known as the Codex +Argenteus, was afterwards transferred to Prague, and +when Prague was taken in 1648 by Count Königsmark, +he carried this Codex to Upsala in Sweden, where it is +still preserved as one of the greatest treasures. The +parchment is purple, the letters in silver, and the MS. +bound in solid silver. +</p> + +<p> +In 1818, Cardinal Mai and Count Castiglione discovered +some more fragments in the Monastery of +Bobbio, where they had probably been preserved ever +since the Gothic empire of Theodoric the Great in Italy +had been destroyed. +</p> + +<p> +Ulfilas must have been a man of extraordinary power +to conceive, for the first time, the idea of translating the +Bible into the vulgar language of his people. At his +time, there existed in Europe but two languages which +a Christian bishop would have thought himself justified +in employing, Greek and Latin. All other languages +were still considered as barbarous. It required a prophetic +<pb n='189'/><anchor id='Pg189'/> +sight, and a faith in the destinies of these half-savage +tribes, and a conviction also of the utter effeteness +of the Roman and Byzantine empires, before a bishop +could have brought himself to translate the Bible into +the vulgar dialect of his barbarous countrymen. Soon +after the death of Ulfilas, the number of Christian +Goths at Constantinople had so much increased as to +induce Chrysostom, the bishop of Constantinople (397-405), +to establish a church in the capital, where the +service was to be read in Gothic.<note place='foot'>Theodoret. H. E. V., 30.</note> +</p> + +<p> +The language of Ulfilas, the Gothic, belongs, through +its phonetic structure, to the Low-German class, but in +its grammar it is, <emph>with few exceptions</emph>, far more primitive +than the Anglo-Saxon of the Beowulf, or the Old High-German +of Charlemagne. These few exceptions, however, +are very important, for they show that it would +be grammatically, and therefore historically, impossible +to derive either Anglo-Saxon or High-German, or both,<note place='foot'>For +instances where Old High-German is more primitive than Gothic, +see Schleicher, Zeitschrift für V. S., b. iv. s. 266. Bugge, ibid., b. v. s. 59.</note> +from Gothic. It would be impossible, for instance, to +treat the first person plural of the indicative present, the +Old High-German <emph>nerjamês</emph>, as a corruption of the +Gothic <emph>nasjam</emph>; for we know, from the Sanskrit <emph>masi</emph>, +the Greek <emph>mes</emph>, the Latin <emph>mus</emph>, that this was the original +termination of the first person plural. +</p> + +<p> +Gothic is but one of the numerous dialects of the +German race; some of which became the feeders of the +literary languages of the British Isles, of Holland, +Friesia, and of Low and High Germany, while others +became extinct, and others rolled on from century to +century unheeded, and without ever producing any +<pb n='190'/><anchor id='Pg190'/> +literature at all. It is because Gothic is the only one +of these parallel dialects that can be traced back to the +fourth century, whereas the others disappear from our +sight in the seventh, that it has been mistaken by some +for the original source of all Teutonic speech. The +same arguments, however, which we used against Raynouard, +to show that Provençal could not be considered +as the parent of the Six Romance dialects, would tell +with equal force against the pretensions of Gothic to be +considered as more than the eldest sister of the Teutonic +branch of speech. +</p> + +<p> +There is, in fact, a third stream of Teutonic speech, +which asserts its independence as much as High-German +and Low-German, and which it would be impossible +to place in any but a co-ordinate position with +regard to Gothic, Low and High German. This is the +<emph>Scandinavian</emph> branch. It consists at present of three +literary dialects, those of Sweden, Denmark, and Iceland, +and of various local dialects, particularly in secluded +valleys and fiords of Norway,<note place='foot'>See +Schleicher, Deutsche Sprache, p. 94.</note> where, however, +the literary language is Danish. +</p> + +<p> +It is commonly supposed<note place='foot'>Ibid. s. 60.</note> +that, as late as the eleventh +century, identically the same language was spoken in +Sweden, Norway, and Denmark, and that this language +was preserved almost intact in Iceland, while in Sweden +and Denmark it grew into two new national dialects. +Nor is there any doubt that the Icelandic skald recited +his poems in Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, nay, +even among his countrymen in England and Gardariki, +without fear of not being understood, till, as it is said, +William introduced Welsh, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> French, into England, +<pb n='191'/><anchor id='Pg191'/> +and Slavonic tongues grew up in the east.<note place='foot'>Weinhold, +Altnordisches Leben, p. 27; Gunnlaugssaga, c. 7.</note> But though +one and the same language (then called Danish or Norrænish) +was understood, I doubt whether one and the +same language was spoken by all Northmen, and whether +the first germs of Swedish and Danish did not exist long +before the eleventh century, in the dialects of the numerous +clans and tribes of the Scandinavian race. That +race is clearly divided into two branches, called by +Swedish scholars the East and West Scandinavian. +The former would be represented by the old language +of Norway and Iceland, the latter by Swedish and +Danish. This division of the Scandinavian race had +taken place before the Northmen settled in Sweden and +Norway. The western division migrated westward from +Russia, and crossed over from the continent to the +Aland Islands, and from thence to the southern coast of +the peninsula. The eastern division travelled along +the Bothnian Gulf, passing the country occupied by the +Finns and Lapps, and settled in the northern highlands, +spreading toward the south and west. +</p> + +<p> +The earliest fragments of Scandinavian speech are +preserved in the two <hi rend='italic'>Eddas</hi>, the elder or poetical Edda, +containing old mythic poems, the younger or Snorri's +Edda giving an account of the ancient mythology in +prose. Both Eddas were composed, not in Norway, +but in Iceland, an island about as large as Ireland, and +which became first known through some Irish monks +who settled there in the eighth century.<note place='foot'>See +Dasent's Burnt Njal, Introduction.</note> In the ninth +century voyages of discovery were made to Iceland by +Naddodd, Gardar, and Flokki, 860-870, and soon after +the distant island, distant about 750 English miles from +<pb n='192'/><anchor id='Pg192'/> +Norway, became a kind of America to the Puritans and +Republicans of the Scandinavian peninsula. Harald +Haarfagr (850-933) had conquered most of the Norwegian +kings, and his despotic sway tended to reduce the +northern freemen to a state of vassalage. Those who +could not resist, and could not bring themselves to yield +to the sceptre of Harald, left their country and migrated +to France, to England, and to Iceland (874). They +were mostly nobles and freemen, and they soon established +in Iceland an aristocratic republic, such as they +had had in Norway before the days of Harald. This +northern republic flourished; it adopted Christianity in +the year 1000. Schools were founded, two bishoprics +were established, and classical literature was studied +with the same zeal with which their own national poems +and laws had been collected and interpreted by native +scholars and historians. The Icelanders were famous +travellers, and the names of Icelandic students are found +not only in the chief cities of Europe, but in the holy +places of the East. At the beginning of the twelfth +century Iceland counted 50,000 inhabitants. Their intellectual +and literary activity lasted to the beginning +of the thirteenth century, when the island was conquered +by Hakon VI., king of Norway. In 1380, Norway, +together with Iceland, was united with Denmark; +and when, in 1814, Norway was ceded to Sweden, Iceland +remained, as it is still, under Danish sway. +</p> + +<p> +The old poetry which flourished in Norway in the +eighth century, and which was cultivated by the skalds +in the ninth, would have been lost in Norway itself had +it not been for the jealous care with which it was preserved +by the emigrants of Iceland. The most important +branch of their traditional poetry were short +<pb n='193'/><anchor id='Pg193'/> +songs (hliod or Quida), relating the deeds of their gods +and heroes. It is impossible to determine their age, +but they existed at least previous to the migration of +the Northmen to Iceland, and probably as early as the +seventh century, the same century which yields the +oldest remnants of Anglo-Saxon, Low-German, and +High-German. They were collected in the middle +of the twelfth century by <hi rend='italic'>Saemund Sigfusson</hi> (died +1133). In 1643 a similar collection was discovered +in MSS. of the thirteenth century, and published under +the title of <hi rend='italic'>Edda</hi>, or Great-Grandmother. This +collection is called the old or poetic Edda, in order +to distinguish it from a later work ascribed to Snorri +Sturluson (died 1241). This, the younger or prose +Edda, consists of three parts: the mocking of Gylfi, +the speeches of Bragi, and the Skalda, or <hi rend='italic'>Ars poetica</hi>. +Snorri Sturluson has been called the Herodotus of +Iceland; and his chief work is the <q>Heimskringla,</q> +the world-ring, which contains the northern history +from the mythic times to the time of King Magnus +Erlingsson (died 1177). It was probably in preparing +his history that, like Cassiodorus, Saxo Grammaticus, +Paulus Diaconus, and other historians of the same +class, Snorri collected the old songs of the people; for +his <q>Edda,</q> and particularly his <q>Skalda,</q> are full +of ancient poetic fragments. +</p> + +<p> +The <q>Skalda,</q> and the rules which it contains, +represent the state of poetry in the thirteenth century; +and nothing can be more artificial, nothing +more different from the genuine poetry of the old +<q>Edda</q> than this <hi rend='italic'>Ars poetica</hi> of Snorri Sturluson. +One of the chief features of this artificial or skaldic +poetry was this, that nothing should be called by its +<pb n='194'/><anchor id='Pg194'/> +proper name. A ship was not to be called a ship, +but the beast of the sea; blood, not blood, but the +dew of pain, or the water of the sword. A warrior +was not spoken of as a warrior, but as an armed tree, +the tree of battle. A sword was the flame of wounds. +In this poetical language, which every skald was bound +to speak, there were no less than 115 names for Odin; +an island could be called by 120 synonymous titles. +The specimens of ancient poetry which Snorri quotes +are taken from the skalds, whose names are well +known in history, and who lived from the tenth to +the thirteenth century. But he never quotes from +any song contained in the old <q>Edda,</q><note place='foot'>The name +Edda is not found before the fourteenth century. Snorri +Sturluson does not know the word Edda, nor any collection of ancient +poems attributed to Saemund; and though Saemund may have made the +first collection of national poetry, it is doubtful whether the work which we +possess under his name is his.</note> whether it +be that those songs were considered by himself as +belonging to a different and much more ancient period +of literature, or that they could not be used in illustration +of the scholastic rules of skaldic poets, these +very rules being put to shame by the simple style of +the national poetry, which expressed what it had to +express without effort and circumlocution. +</p> + +<p> +We have thus traced the modern Teutonic dialects +back to four principal channels,—the <emph>High-German</emph>, +<emph>Low-German</emph>, <emph>Gothic</emph>, and <emph>Scandinavian</emph>; and we have +seen that these four, together with several minor dialects, +must be placed in a co-ordinate position from +the beginning, as so many varieties of Teutonic speech. +This Teutonic speech may, for convenience' sake, be +spoken of as one,—as one branch of that great family +of language to which, as we shall see, it belongs; but +<pb n='195'/><anchor id='Pg195'/> +it should always be borne in mind that this primitive +and uniform language never had any real historical +existence, and that, like all other languages, that of +the Germans began with dialects which gradually +formed themselves into several distinct national deposits. +</p> + +<p> +We must now advance more rapidly, and, instead +of the minuteness of an Ordnance-map, we must be +satisfied with the broad outlines of Wyld's Great Globe +in our survey of the languages which, together with the +Teutonic, form the Indo-European or Aryan family of +speech. +</p> + +<p> +And first the Romance, or modern Latin languages. +Leaving mere local dialects out of sight, we have at +present six literary modifications of Latin, or more +correctly, of ancient Italian,—the languages of Portugal, +of Spain, of France, of Italy, of Wallachia,<note place='foot'><p>The +people whom we call Wallachians, call themselves Romàni, and +their language Romània. +</p> +<p> +This Romance language is spoken in Wallachia and Moldavia, and in +parts of Hungary, Transylvania, and Bessarabia. On the right bank of +the Danube it occupies some parts of the old Thracia, Macedonia, and even +Thessaly. +</p> +<p> +It is divided by the Danube into two branches: the Northern or Daco-romanic, +and the Southern or Macedo-romanic. The former is less mixed, +and has received a certain literary culture; the latter has borrowed a larger +number of Albanian and Greek words, and has never been fixed grammatically. +</p> +<p> +The modern Wallachian is the daughter of the language spoken in the +Roman province of Dacia. +</p> +<p> +The original inhabitants of Dacia were called Thracians, and their language +Illyrian. We have hardly any remains of the ancient Illyrian language +to enable us to form an opinion as to its relationship with Greek or +any other family of speech. +</p> +<p> +219 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi>, the Romans conquered Illyria; 30 +<hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi>, they took Moesia; and 107 +<hi rend='smallcaps'>a. d.</hi>, the Emperor Trajan made Dacia a Roman province. At that +time the Thracian population had been displaced by the advance of Sarmatian +tribes, particularly the Yazyges. Roman colonists introduced the +Latin language; and Dacia was maintained as a colony up to 272, when +the Emperor Aurelian had to cede it to the Goths. Part of the Roman inhabitants +then emigrated and settled south of the Danube. +</p> +<p> +In 489 the Slavonic tribes began their advance into Mœsia and Thracia. +They were settled in Mœsia by 678, and eighty years later a province was +founded in Macedonia, under the name of Slavinia.</p></note> and +<pb n='196'/><anchor id='Pg196'/> +of the Grisons of Switzerland, called the Roumansch +or Romanese.<note place='foot'>The entire Bible has been published by the Bible Society +in Romanese, for the Grisons in Switzerland; and in Lower Romanese, or Enghadine, +as spoken on the borders of the Tyrol.</note> The Provençal, which, in the poetry +of the Troubadours, attained at a very early time to a +high literary excellence, has now sunk down to a mere +<hi rend='italic'>patois</hi>. The earliest Provençal poem, the Song of +Boëthius, is generally referred to the tenth century: +Le Bœuf referred it to the eleventh. But in the lately +discovered Song of Eulalia, we have now a specimen +of the Langue d'Oil, or the ancient Northern French, +anterior in date to the earliest poetic specimen of the +Langue d'Oc, or the ancient Provençal. Nothing +can be a better preparation for the study of the comparative +grammar of the ancient Aryan languages than +a careful perusal of the <q>Comparative Grammar of the +Six Romance Languages</q> by Professor Diez. +</p> + +<p> +Though in a general way we trace these six Romance +languages back to Latin, yet it has been pointed out before +that the classical Latin would fail to supply a complete +explanation of their origin. Many of the ingredients +of the Neo-Latin dialects must be sought for in +the ancient dialects of Italy and her provinces. More +than one dialect of Latin was spoken there before the +rise of Rome, and some important fragments have been +preserved to us, in inscriptions, of the Umbrian spoken +in the north, and of the Oscan spoken to the south of +Rome. The Oscan language, spoken by the Samnites, +now rendered intelligible by the labors of Mommsen, +<pb n='197'/><anchor id='Pg197'/> +had produced a literature before the time of Livius +Andronicus; and the tables of Iguvio, so elaborately +treated by Aufrecht and Kirchhoff, bear witness to a +priestly literature among the Umbrians at a very early +period. Oscan was still spoken under the Roman emperors, +and so were minor local dialects in the south +and the north. As soon as the literary language of +Rome became classical and unchangeable, the first +start was made in the future career of those dialects +which, even at the time of Dante, are still called <emph>vulgar</emph> +or <emph>popular</emph>.<note place='foot'><q>Ed il primo, +così Dante, che cominciò a dire come poeta volgare, si +mosse, perocchè volle far intendere le sue parole a donna alla quale era +malagevole ad intendere versi Latini.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Vita +Nuova</hi>.</note> A great deal, no doubt, of the corruption +of these modern dialects is due to the fact that, +in the form in which we know them after the eighth +century, they are really Neo-Latin dialects as adopted +by the Teutonic barbarians; full, not only of Teutonic +words, but of Teutonic idioms, phrases, and constructions. +French is provincial Latin as spoken by the +Franks, a Teutonic race; and, to a smaller extent, the +same <emph>barbarizing</emph> has affected all other Roman dialects. +But from the very beginning, the stock with which the +Neo-Latin dialects started was not the classical Latin, but +the vulgar, local, provincial dialects of the middle, the +lower, and the lowest classes of the Roman Empire. +Many of the words which give to French and Italian +their classical appearance, are really of much later +date, and were imported into them by mediæval scholars, +lawyers, and divines; thus escaping the rough +treatment to which the original vulgar dialects were +subjected by the Teutonic conquerors. +</p> + +<p> +The next branch of the Indo-European family of +<pb n='198'/><anchor id='Pg198'/> +speech is the <emph>Hellenic</emph>. Its history is well known from +the time of Homer to the present day. The only remark +which the comparative philologist has to make is +that the idea of making Greek the parent of Latin, is +more preposterous than deriving English from German; +the fact being that there are many forms in Latin more +primitive than their corresponding forms in Greek. +The idea of Pelasgians as the common ancestors of +Greeks and Romans is another of those grammatical +mythes, but hardly requires at present any serious refutation. +</p> + +<p> +The fourth branch of our family is the <emph>Celtic</emph>. The +Celts seem to have been the first of the Aryans to arrive +in Europe; but the pressure of subsequent migrations, +particularly of Teutonic tribes, has driven them +towards the westernmost parts, and latterly from Ireland +across the Atlantic. At present the only remaining +dialects are the Kymric and Gadhelic. The <emph>Kymric</emph> +comprises the <emph>Welsh</emph>; the <emph>Cornish</emph>, lately extinct; +and the <emph>Armorican</emph>, of Brittany. The <emph>Gadhelic</emph> comprises +the <emph>Irish</emph>; the <emph>Galic</emph> of the west coast of Scotland; +and the dialect of the <emph>Isle of Man</emph>. Although +these Celtic dialects are still spoken, the Celts themselves +can no longer be considered an independent +nation, like the Germans or Slaves. In former times, +however, they not only enjoyed political autonomy, but +asserted it successfully against Germans and Romans. +Gaul, Belgium, and Britain were Celtic dominions, +and the north of Italy was chiefly inhabited by them. +In the time of Herodotus we find Celts in Spain; and +Switzerland, the Tyrol, and the country south of the +Danube have once been the seats of Celtic tribes. But +after repeated inroads into the regions of civilization, +<pb n='199'/><anchor id='Pg199'/> +familiarizing Latin and Greek writers with the names +of their kings, they disappear from the east of Europe. +Brennus is supposed to mean king, the Welsh <emph>brennin</emph>. +A Brennus conquered Rome (390), another Brennus +threatened Delphi (280). And about the same time a +Celtic colony settled in Asia, and founded Galatia, where +the language spoken at the time of St. Jerome was +still that of the Gauls. Celtic words may be found in +German, Slavonic, and even in Latin, but only as +foreign terms, and their amount is much smaller than +commonly supposed. A far larger number of Latin +and German words have since found their way into +the modern Celtic dialects, and these have frequently +been mistaken by Celtic enthusiasts for original words, +from which German and Latin might, in their turn, be +derived. +</p> + +<p> +The fifth branch, which is commonly called <emph>Slavonic</emph>, +I prefer to designate by the name of <emph>Windic</emph>, <emph>Winidae</emph> +being one of the most ancient and comprehensive +names by which these tribes were known to the early +historians of Europe. We have to divide these tribes +into two divisions, the <emph>Lettic</emph> and the <emph>Slavonic</emph>, and we +shall have to subdivide the Slavonic again into a <emph>South-East +Slavonic</emph> and a <emph>West Slavonic</emph> branch. +</p> + +<p> +The <emph>Lettic</emph> division consists of languages hardly known +to the student of literature, but of great importance to +the student of language. <emph>Lettish</emph> is the language now +spoken in Kurland and Livonia. <emph>Lithuanian</emph> is the +name given to a language still spoken by about 200,000 +people in Eastern Prussia, and by more than a million +of people in the coterminous parts of Russia. The +earliest literary document of Lithuanian is a small catechism +of 1547.<note place='foot'>Schleicher, Beiträge, i. 19.</note> +In this, and even in the language as +<pb n='200'/><anchor id='Pg200'/> +now spoken by the Lithuanian peasant, there are some +grammatical forms more primitive, and more like Sanskrit, +than the corresponding forms in Greek and Latin. +</p> + +<p> +The <emph>Old Prussian</emph>, which is nearly related to Lithuanian, +became extinct in the seventeenth century, +and the entire literature which it has left behind consists +in an old catechism. +</p> + +<p> +<emph>Lettish</emph> is the language of Kurland and Livonia, more +modern in its grammar than Lithuanian, yet not immediately +derived from it. +</p> + +<p> +We now come to the <emph>Slavonic</emph> languages, properly so +called. The eastern branch comprehends the <emph>Russian</emph> +with various local dialects; the <emph>Bulgarian</emph>, and the +<emph>Illyrian</emph>. The most ancient document of this eastern +branch is the so-called Ecclesiastical Slavonic, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> the +ancient Bulgarian, into which Cyrillus and Methodius +translated the Bible, in the middle of the ninth century. +This is still the authorized version<note place='foot'>Oldest +dated MS. of 1056, written for Prince Ostromir. Some older +written with Glagolitic letters. Schleicher, Beiträge, b. i. s. 20.</note> of the Bible +for the whole Slavonic race; and to the student of the +Slavonic languages, it is what Gothic is to the student +of German. The modern Bulgarian, on the contrary, +as far as grammatical forms are concerned, is the most +reduced among the Slavonic dialects. +</p> + +<p> +<emph>Illyrian</emph> is a convenient or inconvenient name to +comprehend the <emph>Servian</emph>, <emph>Croatian</emph>, +and <emph>Slovinian</emph> dialects. +Literary fragments of <emph>Slovinian</emph> go back as far +as the tenth century.<note place='foot'>Schleicher, s. 22.</note> +</p> + +<p> +The western branch comprehends the language of +<emph>Poland</emph>, <emph>Bohemia</emph>, and <emph>Lusatia</emph>. The oldest specimen +of Polish belongs to the fourteenth century: the Psalter +<pb n='201'/><anchor id='Pg201'/> +of Margarite. The Bohemian language was, till +lately, traced back to the ninth century. But most of +these old Bohemian poems are now considered spurious; +and it is doubtful, even, whether an ancient interlinear +translation of the Gospel of St. John can be ascribed +to the tenth century.<note place='foot'>Schleicher, Deutsche Sprache, s. 77.</note> +</p> + +<p> +The language of Lusatia is spoken, probably, by no +more than 150,000 people, known in Germany by the +name of <emph>Wends</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +We have examined all the languages of our first or +Aryan family, which are spoken in Europe, with one +exception, the <emph>Albanian</emph>. This language is clearly a +member of the same family; and as it is sufficiently +distinct from Greek or any other recognized language, +it has been traced back to one of the neighboring races +of the Greeks, the Illyrians, and is supposed to be the +only surviving representative of the various so-called +barbarous tongues which surrounded and interpenetrated +the dialects of Greece. +</p> + +<p> +We now pass on from Europe to Asia; and here we +begin at once, on the extreme south, with the languages +of India. As I sketched the history of Sanskrit +in one of my former Lectures, it must suffice, at +present, to mark the different periods of that language, +beginning, about 1500 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi>, with the dialect of the +Vedas, which is followed by the modern Sanskrit; the +popular dialects of the third century <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi>; the Prakrit +dialects of the plays; and the spoken dialects, such +as Hindí, Hindústání, Mahrattí, Bengalí. There are +many points of great interest to the student of language, +in the long history of the speech of India; and +it has been truly said that Sanskrit is to the science of +<pb n='202'/><anchor id='Pg202'/> +language what mathematics are to astronomy. In an +introductory course of lectures, however, like the present, +it would be out of place to enter on a minute +analysis of the grammatical organism of this language +of languages. +</p> + +<p> +There is one point only on which I may be allowed +to say a few words. I have frequently been asked, +<q>But how can you prove that Sanskrit literature is so +old as it is supposed to be? How can you fix any +Indian dates before the time of Alexander's conquest? +What dependence can be placed on Sanskrit manuscripts +which may have been forged or interpolated?</q> +It is easier to ask such questions than to answer them, +at least to answer them briefly and intelligibly. But, +perhaps, the following argument will serve as a partial +answer, and show that Sanskrit was the spoken language +of India at least some centuries before the time +of Solomon. In the hymns of the Veda, which are +the oldest literary compositions in Sanskrit, the geographical +horizon of the poets is, for the greater part, +limited to the north-west of India. There are very few +passages in which any allusions to the sea or the sea-coast +occur, whereas the snowy mountains, and the rivers +of the Penjáb, and the scenery of the Upper Ganges +valley are familiar objects to the ancient bards. There +is no doubt, in fact, that the people who spoke Sanskrit +came into India from the north, and gradually +extended their sway to the south and east. Now, at the +time of Solomon, it can be proved that Sanskrit was +spoken at least as far south as the mouth of the Indus. +</p> + +<p> +You remember the fleet of Tharshish<note place='foot'>1 +Kings viii. 21.</note> which Solomon +had at sea, together with the navy of Hiram, and +<pb n='203'/><anchor id='Pg203'/> +which came once in three years, bringing <emph>gold</emph> and +<emph>silver</emph>, <emph>ivory</emph>, <emph>apes</emph>, +and <emph>peacocks</emph>. The same navy, +which was stationed on the shore of the Red Sea, is +said to have fetched gold from <emph>Ophir</emph>,<note place='foot'>1 +Kings ix. 26.</note> and to have +brought, likewise, great plenty of <emph>algum</emph><note place='foot'>1 +Kings x. 11.</note> trees and +precious stones from Ophir. +</p> + +<p> +Well, a great deal has been written to find out +where this Ophir was; but there can be no doubt +that it was in India. The names for <emph>apes</emph>, <emph>peacocks</emph>, +<emph>ivory</emph> and <emph>algum</emph>-trees are foreign words in Hebrew, as +much as <emph>gutta-percha</emph> or <emph>tobacco</emph> are in English. Now, +if we wished to know from what part of the world +<emph>gutta-percha</emph> was first imported into England, we might +safely conclude that it came from that country where +the name, <emph>gutta-percha</emph>, formed part of the +spoken language.<note place='foot'><emph>Gutta</emph> in +Malay means <emph>gum</emph>, <emph>percha</emph> is the name of the tree (Isonandra +gutta), or of an island from which the tree was first imported (Pulo-percha).</note> +If, therefore, we can find a language in which +the names for peacock, apes, ivory, and algum-tree, +which are foreign in Hebrew, are indigenous, we may +be certain that the country in which that language +was spoken must have been the Ophir of the Bible. +That language is no other but Sanskrit. +</p> + +<p> +<emph>Apes</emph> are called, in Hebrew, <emph>koph</emph>, a word without an +etymology in the Semitic languages, but nearly identical +in sound with the Sanskrit name of ape, <emph>kapi</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +<emph>Ivory</emph> is called either <emph>karnoth-shen</emph>, horns of tooth; +or <emph>shen habbim</emph>. This <emph>habbim</emph> is again without a derivation +in Hebrew, but it is most likely a corruption of +the Sanskrit name for elephant, <emph>ibha</emph>, preceded by the +Semitic article.<note place='foot'>See Lassen, Indische +Alterthumskunde, b. i. s. 537.</note> +</p> + +<pb n='204'/><anchor id='Pg204'/> + +<p> +<emph>Peacocks</emph> are called in Hebrew <emph>tukhi-im</emph>, and this +finds its explanation in the name still used for peacock +on the coast of Malabar, <emph>togëi</emph>, which in turn has been +derived from the Sanskrit <emph>śikhin</emph>, meaning furnished +with a crest. +</p> + +<p> +All these articles, ivory, gold, apes, peacocks, are +indigenous in India, though of course they might have +been found in other countries likewise. Not so the +<emph>algum-tree</emph>, at least if interpreters are right in taking +<emph>algum</emph> or <emph>almug</emph> for sandalwood. Sandalwood is found +indigenous on the coast of Malabar only; and one of +its numerous names there, and in Sanskrit, is <emph>valguka</emph>. +This <emph>valgu</emph>(<emph>ka</emph>) is clearly the name which Jewish and +Phœnician merchants corrupted into <emph>algum</emph>, and which +in Hebrew was still further changed into <emph>almug</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +Now, the place where the navy of Solomon and +Hiram, coming down the Red Sea, would naturally +have landed, was the mouth of the Indus. There +<emph>gold</emph> and <emph>precious stones</emph> from the north would have +been brought down the Indus; and <emph>sandalwood</emph>, <emph>peacocks</emph>, +and <emph>apes</emph> would have been brought from Central +and Southern India. In this very locality Ptolemy +(vii. 1) gives us the name of <emph>Abiria</emph>, above <emph>Pattalene</emph>. +In the same locality Hindu geographers place the people +called <emph>Abhîra</emph> or <emph>Âbhîra</emph>; and in the same neighborhood +MacMurdo, in his account of the province of +Cutch, still knows a race of <emph>Ahirs</emph>,<note place='foot'>See +also Sir Henry Elliot's Supplementary Glossary, s. v. Aheer.</note> the descendants, in +all probability, of the people who sold to Hiram and +Solomon their gold and precious stones, their apes, +peacocks, and sandalwood.<note place='foot'>The arguments brought +forward by Quatremère in his <q>Mémoire sur +le Pays d'Ophir</q> against fixing Ophir on the Indian coast are +not conclusive. The arguments derived from the names of the articles exported from +Ophir were unknown to him. It is necessary to mention this, because +Quatremère's name carries great weight, and his essay on Ophir has lately +been republished in the Bibliothèque Classique des Célébrités Contemporaines. +1861.</note> +</p> + +<pb n='205'/><anchor id='Pg205'/> + +<p> +If, then, in the Veda the people who spoke Sanskrit +were still settled in the north of India, whereas +at the time of Solomon their language had extended +to Cutch and even the Malabar coast, this will show +that at all events Sanskrit is not of yesterday, and +that it is as old, at least, as the book of Job, in which +the gold of Ophir is mentioned.<note place='foot'>Job xxii. 24.</note> +</p> + +<p> +Most closely allied to Sanskrit, more particularly to +the Sanskrit of the Veda, is the ancient language of +the Zend-avesta,<note place='foot'><emph>Zend-avesta</emph> +is the name used by Chaqâni and other Muhammedan +writers. The Parsis use the name <q><emph>Avesta</emph> and <emph>Zend</emph>,</q> +taking <emph>Avesta</emph> in the sense of text, and +<emph>Zend</emph> as the title of the Pehlevi commentary. I doubt, however, whether this +was the original meaning of the word <emph>Zend</emph>. <emph>Zend</emph> +was more likely the same word as the Sanskrit <emph>chhandas</emph> (scandere) a name +given to the Vedic hymns, and <emph>avesta</emph>, the Sanskrit <emph>avasthâna</emph>, a +word which, though it does not occur in Sanskrit, would mean settled text. +<emph>Avasthita</emph>, in Sanskrit, means laid down, settled. The Zend-avesta now +consists of four books, Yasna, Vispered, Yashts, and Vendidad (Vendidad += vidaeva dâta; in Pehlevi, Juddivdad). Dr. Haug, in his interesting +lecture on the <q>Origin of the Parsee Religion,</q> Bombay, 1861, takes +<emph>Avesta</emph> in the sense of the most ancient texts, <emph>Zend</emph> as +commentary, and <emph>Pazend</emph> as explanatory notes, all equally written in what we +shall continue to call the Zend language.</note> the so-called <emph>Zend</emph>, or +sacred language of the Zoroastrians or Fire-worshippers. It +was, in fact, chiefly through the Sanskrit, and with +the help of comparative philology, that the ancient +dialect of the Parsis or Fire-worshippers was deciphered. +The MSS. had been preserved by the Parsi +priests at Bombay, where a colony of fire-worshippers +had fled in the tenth century,<note place='foot'><q>According to +the Kissah-i-Sanján, a tract almost worthless as a +record of the early history of the Parsis, the fire-worshippers took refuge +in Khorassan forty-nine years before the era of Yezdegerd +(632 <hi rend='smallcaps'>a. d.</hi>), or +about 583. Here they stayed 100 years, to 683, then departed to the city +of Hormaz (Ormus, in the Persian Gulf), and after staying fifteen years, +proceeded in 698 to Diu, an island on the south-west coast of Katiawar. +Here they remained nineteen years, to 717, and then proceeded to Sanján, +a town about twenty-four miles south of Damaun. After 300 years they +spread to the neighboring towns of Guzerat, and established the sacred fire +successively at Barsadah, Nauśari, near Surat, and +Bombay.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Bombay +Quarterly Review</hi>, 1856, No. viii. p. 67.</note> and where it has +<pb n='206'/><anchor id='Pg206'/> +risen since to considerable wealth and influence. +Other settlements of Guebres are to be found in +Yezd and parts of Kerman. A Frenchman, Anquetil +Duperron, was the first to translate the Zend-avesta, +but his translation was not from the original, but from +a modern Persian translation. The first European +who attempted to read the original words of Zoroaster +was Rask, the Dane; and after his premature death, +Burnouf, in France, achieved one of the greatest triumphs +in modern scholarship by deciphering the language +of the Zend-avesta, and establishing its close +relationship with Sanskrit. The same doubts which +were expressed about the age and the genuineness of +the Veda, were repeated with regard to the Zend-avesta, +by men of high authority as oriental scholars, +by Sir W. Jones himself, and even by the late Professor +Wilson. But Burnouf's arguments, based at +first on grammatical evidence only, were irresistible, +and have of late been most signally confirmed by the +discovery of the cuneiform inscriptions of Darius and +Xerxes. That there was a Zoroaster, an ancient sage, +was known long before Burnouf. Plato speaks of a +teacher of Zoroaster's Magic (Μαγεία), and calls Zoroaster +the son of <emph>Oromazes</emph>.<note place='foot'> Alc. i. +p. 122, <hi rend='italic'>a</hi>. Ὁ μὲν μαγείαν διδάσκει τὴν +Ζωροάστρου τοῦ +Ὠρομάζον; ἔστι δὲ τοῦτο θεῶν θεραπεία.</note> +</p> + +<p> +This name of Oromazes is important; for Oromazes +<pb n='207'/><anchor id='Pg207'/> +is clearly meant for <emph>Ormuzd</emph>, the god of the Zoroastrians. +The name of this god, as read in the inscriptions +of Darius and Xerxes, is <emph>Auramazdâ</emph>, which comes +very near to Plato's Oromazes.<note place='foot'>In the +inscriptions we find, nom. <emph>Auramazdâ</emph>, gen. <emph>Auramazdâha</emph>, acc. +<emph>Auramazdam</emph>.</note> Thus Darius says, +in one passage: <q>Through the grace of Auramazda I +am king; Auramazda gave me the kingdom.</q> But +what is the meaning of <emph>Auramazda</emph>? We receive a +hint from one passage in the Achæmenian inscriptions, +where Auramazda is divided into two words, both +being declined. The genitive of Auramazda occurs +there as <emph>Aurahya mazdâha</emph>. But even this is unintelligible, +and is, in fact, nothing but a phonetic corruption +of the name of the supreme Deity as it occurs +on every page of the Zend-avesta, namely, <emph>Ahurô +mazdâo</emph> (nom.). Here, too, both words are declined; +and instead of <emph>Ahurô mazdâo</emph>, we also find <emph>Mazdâo +ahurô</emph>.<note place='foot'>Gen. <emph>Ahurahe mazdâo</emph>, dat. +<emph>mazdâi</emph>, acc. <emph>mazdam</emph>.</note> +Well, this <emph>Ahurô mazdâo</emph> is represented in +the Zend-avesta as the creator and ruler of the world; +as good, holy, and true; and as doing battle against +all that is evil, dark, and false. <q>The wicked perish +through the wisdom and holiness of the living wise +Spirit.</q> In the oldest hymns, the power of darkness, +which is opposed to <emph>Ahurô mazdâo</emph> has not yet received +its proper name, which is <emph>Angrô mainyus</emph>, the +later <emph>Ahriman</emph>; but it is spoken of as a power, as <emph>Drukhs</emph> +or deceit; and the principal doctrine which Zoroaster +came to preach was that we must choose between these +two powers, that we must be good, and not bad. These +are his words:— +</p> + +<p> +<q>In the beginning there was a pair of twins, two +<pb n='208'/><anchor id='Pg208'/> +spirits, each of a peculiar activity. These are the +Good and the Base in thought, word, and deed. +Choose one of these two spirits; Be good, not +base!</q><note place='foot'>Haug, Lecture, p. 11; and in Bunsen's Egypt.</note> +</p> + +<p> +Or again:— +</p> + +<p> +<q>Ahuramazda is holy, true, to be honored through +veracity, through holy deeds.</q> <q>You cannot serve +both.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Now, if we wanted to prove that Anglo-Saxon was +a real language, and more ancient than English, a mere +comparison of a few words such as <emph>lord</emph> and <emph>hlafford</emph>, +<emph>gospel</emph> and <emph>godspel</emph> would be +sufficient. <emph>Hlafford</emph> has a +meaning; <emph>lord</emph> has none; therefore we may safely say +that without such a compound as <emph>hlafford</emph>, the word +<emph>lord</emph> could never have arisen. The same, if we compare +the language of the Zend-avesta with that of the +cuneiform inscriptions of Darius. <emph>Auramazdâ</emph> is clearly +a corruption of <emph>Ahurô mazdâo</emph>, and if the language of +the Mountain-records of Behistun is genuine, then, <hi rend='italic'>à +fortiori</hi>, is the language of the Zend-avesta genuine, as +deciphered by Burnouf, long before he had deciphered +the language of Cyrus and Darius. But what is the +meaning of <emph>Ahurô mazdâo</emph>? Here Zend does not give +us an answer; but we must look to Sanskrit, as the +more primitive language, just as we looked from French +to Italian, in order to discover the original form and +meaning of <emph>feu</emph>. According to the rules which govern +the changes of words, common to Zend and Sanskrit, +<emph>Ahurô mazdâo</emph> corresponds to the Sanskrit <emph>Asuro medhas</emph>; +and this would mean the <q>Wise Spirit,</q> neither +more nor less. +</p> + +<p> +We have editions, translations, and commentaries of +<pb n='209'/><anchor id='Pg209'/> +the Zend-avesta by Burnouf, Brockhaus, Spiegel, and +Westergaard. Yet there still remains much to be done. +Dr. Haug, now settled at Poona, has lately taken up +the work which Burnouf left unfinished. He has +pointed out that the text of the Zend-avesta, as we +have it, comprises fragments of very different antiquity, +and that the most ancient only, the so-called Gâthâs, +can be ascribed to Zarathustra. <q>This portion,</q> he +writes in a lecture just received from India, <q>compared +with the whole bulk of the Zend fragments is very +small; but by the difference of dialect it is easily +recognized. The most important pieces written in +this peculiar dialect are called Gâthâs or songs, arranged +in five small collections; they have different +metres, which mostly agree with those of the Veda; +their language is very near to the Vedic dialect.</q> It +is to be regretted that in the same lecture, which holds +out the promise of so much that will be extremely valuable, +Dr. Haug should have lent his authority to the +opinion that Zoroaster or Zarathustra is mentioned in +the Rig-Veda as Jaradashṭi. The meaning of jaradashti +in the Rig-Veda may be seen in the Sanskrit +Dictionary of the Russian Academy, and no Sanskrit +scholar would seriously think of translating the word +by Zoroaster. +</p> + +<p> +At what time Zoroaster lived, is a more difficult +question which we cannot discuss at present.<note place='foot'><p>Berosus, as +preserved in the Armenian translation of Eusebius, mentions +a Median dynasty of Babylon, beginning with a king Zoroaster, long +before Ninus; his date would be 2234 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi> +</p> +<p> +Xanthus, the Lydian (470 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi>), as quoted by Diogenes +Laertius, places Zoroaster, the prophet, 600 before the Trojan war +(1800 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi>). +</p> +<p> +Aristotle and Eudoxus, according to Pliny (Hist. Nat. xxx. 1), placed +Zoroaster 6000 before Plato; Hermippus 5000 before the Trojan war (Diog. +Laert. proœm.). +</p> +<p> +Pliny (Hist. Nat. xxx. 2) places Zoroaster several thousand years before +Moses the Judæan, who founded another kind of Mageia.</p></note> It must +<pb n='210'/><anchor id='Pg210'/> +suffice if we have proved that he lived, and that his +language, the Zend, is a real language, and anterior +in time to the language of the cuneiform inscriptions. +</p> + +<p> +We trace the subsequent history of the Persian language +from Zend to the inscriptions of the Achæmenian +dynasty; from thence to what is called <emph>Pehlevi</emph> or <emph>Huzvaresh</emph> +(better Huzûresh), the language of the Sassanian +dynasty (226-651), as it is found in the dialect of +the translations of the Zend-avesta, and in the official +language of the Sassanian coins and inscriptions. This +is considerably mixed with Semitic elements, probably +imported from Syria. In a still later form, freed also +from the Semitic elements which abound in Pehlevi, +the language of Persia appears again as <emph>Parsi</emph>, which +differs but little from the language of <emph>Firdusi</emph>, the great +epic poet of Persia, the author of the Shahnámeh, about +1000 <hi rend='smallcaps'>a. d.</hi> The later history of Persian consists entirely +in the gradual increase of Arabic words, which +have crept into the language since the conquest of Persia +and the conversion of the Persians to the religion +of Mohammed. +</p> + +<p> +The other languages which evince by their grammar +and vocabulary a general relationship with Sanskrit +and Persian, but which have received too distinct and +national a character to be classed as mere dialects, are +the languages <emph>of Afghanistan</emph> or the <emph>Pushtú</emph>, the language +of <emph>Bokhára</emph>, the language of the <emph>Kurds</emph>, the <emph>Ossetian</emph> +language in the Caucasus, and the <emph>Armenian</emph>. Much +might be said on every one of these tongues and their +claims to be classed as independent members of the +<pb n='211'/><anchor id='Pg211'/> +Aryan family; but our time is limited, nor has any one +of them acquired, as yet, that importance which belongs +to the vernaculars of India, Persia, Greece, Italy, and +Germany, and to other branches of Aryan speech which +have been analyzed critically, and may be studied historically +in the successive periods of their literary existence. +There is, however, one more language which +we have omitted to mention, and which belongs equally +to Asia and Europe, the language of the <emph>Gipsies</emph>. This +language, though most degraded in its grammar, and +with a dictionary stolen from all the countries through +which the Zingaris passed, is clearly an exile from Hindústán. +</p> + +<p> +You see, from the diagram before you,<note place='foot'>Printed +at the end of these Lectures.</note> that it is +possible to divide the whole Aryan family into two +divisions: the <emph>Southern</emph>, including the Indic and Iranic +classes, and the <emph>Northern</emph> or <emph>North-western</emph>, comprising +all the rest. Sanskrit and Zend share certain words +and grammatical forms in common which do not exist +in any of the other Aryan languages; and there can +be no doubt that the ancestors of the poets of the Veda +and of the worshippers of <emph>Ahurô mazdâo</emph> lived together +for some time after they had left the original home of +the whole Aryan race. For let us see this clearly: +the genealogical classification of languages, as drawn +in this diagram, has an historical meaning. As sure as +the six Romance dialects point to an original home of +Italian shepherds on the seven hills at Rome, the Aryan +languages together point to an earlier period of language, +when the first ancestors of the Indians, the Persians, +the Greeks, the Romans, the Slaves, the Celts, +and the Germans were living together within the same +<pb n='212'/><anchor id='Pg212'/> +enclosures, nay under the same roof. There was a +time when out of many possible names for <emph>father</emph>, <emph>mother</emph>, +<emph>daughter</emph>, <emph>son</emph>, <emph>dog</emph> and +<emph>cow</emph>, <emph>heaven</emph> and <emph>earth</emph>, those +which we find in all the Aryan languages were framed, +and obtained a mastery <emph>in the struggle for life</emph> which is +carried on among synonymous words as much as among +plants and animals. Look at the comparative table of +the auxiliary verb AS, to be, in the different Aryan +languages. The selection of the root AS out of many +roots, equally applicable to the idea of being, and the +joining of this root with one set of personal terminations, +all originally personal pronouns, were individual +acts, or if you like, historical events. They took place +once, at a certain date and in a certain place; and as +we find the same forms preserved by all the members +of the Aryan family, it follows that before the ancestors +of the Indians and Persians started for the south, and +the leaders of the Greek, Roman, Celtic, Teutonic, +and Slavonic colonies marched towards the shores of +Europe, there was a small clan of Aryans, settled probably +on the highest elevation of Central Asia, speaking +a language, not yet Sanskrit or Greek or German, but +containing the dialectical germs of all; a clan that had +advanced to a state of agricultural civilization; that +had recognized the bonds of blood, and sanctioned the +bonds of marriage; and that invoked the Giver of +Light and Life in heaven by the same name which you +may still hear in the temples of Benares, in the basilicas +of Rome, and in our own churches and cathedrals. +</p> + +<p> +After this clan broke up, the ancestors of the Indians +and Zoroastrians must have remained together for some +time in their migrations or new settlements; and I believe +that it was the reform of Zoroaster which produced +<pb n='213'/><anchor id='Pg213'/> +at last the split between the worshippers of the Vedic +gods and the worshippers of Ormuzd. Whether, besides +this division into a southern and northern branch, it is +possible by the same test (the community of particular +words and forms), to discover the successive periods +when the Germans separated from the Slaves, the Celts +from the Italians, or the Italians from the Greeks, seems +more than doubtful. The attempts made by different +scholars have led to different and by no means satisfactory +results;<note place='foot'>See Schleicher, Deutsche +Sprache, s. 81.</note> and it seems best, for the present, to +trace each of the northern classes back to its own dialect, +and to account for the more special coincidences between +such languages as, for instance, the Slavonic and Teutonic, +by admitting that the ancestors of these races +preserved from the beginning certain dialectical peculiarities +which existed before, as well as after, the separation +of the Aryan family. +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='214'/><anchor id='Pg214'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Lecture VI. Comparative Grammar.</head> + +<p> +The genealogical classification of the Aryan languages +was founded, as we saw, on a close comparison of +the grammatical characteristics of each; and it is the object +of such works as Bopp's <q>Comparative Grammar</q> +to show that the grammatical articulation of Sanskrit, +Zend, Greek, Roman, Celtic, Teutonic, and Slavonic, +was produced once and for all; and that the apparent +differences in the terminations of Sanskrit, Greek, and +Latin, must be explained by laws of phonetic decay, peculiar +to each dialect, which modified the original common +Aryan type, and changed it into so many national +languages. It might seem, therefore, as if the object +of comparative grammar was attained as soon as the +exact genealogical relationship of languages had been +settled; and those who only look to the higher problems +of the science of language have not hesitated to +declare that <q>there is no painsworthy difficulty nor dispute +about declension, number, case, and gender of +nouns.</q> But although it is certainly true that comparative +grammar is only a means, and that it has well +nigh taught us all that it has to teach,—at least in the +Aryan family of speech,—it is to be hoped that, in the +science of language, it will always retain that prominent +place which it has obtained through the labors of Bopp, +<pb n='215'/><anchor id='Pg215'/> +Grimm, Pott, Benfey, Curtius, Kuhn, and others. Besides, +comparative grammar has more to do than simply +to compare. It would be easy enough to place side by +side the paradigms of declension and conjugation in Sanskrit, +Greek, Latin, and the other Aryan dialects, and +to mark both their coincidences and their differences. +But after we have done this, and after we have explained +the phonetic laws which cause the primitive +Aryan type to assume that national variety which we +admire in Sanskrit, Greek, and Latin, new problems +arise of a more interesting nature. We know that +grammatical terminations, as they are now called, were +originally independent words, and had their own purpose +and meaning. Is it possible, after comparative +grammar has established the original forms of the Aryan +terminations, to trace them back to independent words, +and to discover their original purpose and meaning? +You will remember that this was the point from which +we started. We wanted to know why the termination +<emph>d</emph> in <emph>I loved</emph> should change a present into a past act. +We saw that before answering this question we had to +discover the most original form of this termination by +tracing it from English to Gothic, and afterwards, if +necessary, from Gothic to Sanskrit. We now return +to our original question, namely, What is language that +a mere formal change, such as that of <emph>I love</emph> into <emph>I loved</emph>, +should produce so very material a difference? +</p> + +<p> +Let us clearly see what we mean if we make a distinction +between the radical and formal elements of a +language; and by formal elements I mean not only the +terminations of declension and conjugation, but all derivative +elements; all, in fact, that is not radical. Our +view on the origin of language must chiefly depend on +<pb n='216'/><anchor id='Pg216'/> +the view which we take of these formal, as opposed to +the radical, elements of speech. Those who consider +that language is a conventional production, base their arguments +principally on these formal elements. The inflections +of words, they maintain, are the best proof +that language was made by mutual agreement. They +look upon them as mere letters or syllables without any +meaning by themselves; and if they were asked why +the mere addition of a <emph>d</emph> changes +<emph>I love</emph> into <emph>I loved</emph>, or +why the addition of the syllable <emph>rai</emph> gave to <emph>j'aime</emph>, I +love, the power of a future, <emph>j'aimerai</emph>, they would answer, +that it was so because, at a very early time in +the history of the world, certain persons, or families, +or clans, agreed that it should be so. +</p> + +<p> +This view was opposed by another which represents +language as an organic and almost a living being, and +explains its formal elements as produced by a principle +of growth inherent in its very nature. <q>Languages,</q><note place='foot'>Farrar, +Origin of Languages, p. 35.</note> +it is maintained, <q>are formed by a process, not of crystalline +accretion, but of germinal development. Every +essential part of language existed as completely (although +only implicitly) in the primitive germ, as the +petals of a flower exist in the bud before the mingled +influences of the sun and the air caused it to unfold.</q> +This view was first propounded by Frederick Schlegel,<note place='foot'><q>It +has been common among grammarians to regard those terminational +changes as evolved by some unknown process from the body of the +noun, as the branches of a tree spring from the stem—or as elements, unmeaning +in themselves, but employed arbitrarily or conventionally to modify +the meanings of words. This latter view is countenanced by Schlegel. +<q>Languages with inflexions,</q> says Schlegel, <q>are organic languages, because +they include a living principle of development and increase, and alone possess, +if I may so express myself, a fruitful and abundant vegetation. The +wonderful mechanism of these languages consists in forming an immense +variety of words, and in marking the connection of ideas expressed by +these words by the help of an inconsiderable number of syllables, <emph>which, +viewed separately, have no signification</emph>, but which determine with precision +the sense of the words to which they are attached. By modifying radical +letters and by adding derivative syllables to the roots, derivative words of +various sorts are formed, and derivatives from those derivatives. Words +are compounded from several roots to express complex ideas. Finally, +substantives, adjectives, and pronouns are declined, with gender, number, +and case; verbs are conjugated throughout voices, moods, tenses, numbers, +and persons, by employing, in like manner, terminations and sometimes +augments, which by themselves signify nothing. This method is attended +with the advantage of enunciating in a single word the principal idea, frequently +greatly modified, and extremely complex already, with its whole array +of accessory ideas and mutable relations.</q></q>—<hi rend='italic'>Transactions +of the Philological Society</hi>, vol. ii. p. 39.</note> +<pb n='217'/><anchor id='Pg217'/> +and it is still held by many with whom poetical phraseology +takes the place of sound and severe reasoning. +</p> + +<p> +The science of language adopts neither of these +views. As to imagining a congress for settling the +proper exponents of such relations as nominative, genitive, +singular, plural, active, and passive, it stands +to reason that if such abstruse problems could have +been discussed in a language void of inflections, there +was no inducement for agreeing on a more perfect +means of communication. And as to imagining language, +that is to say nouns and verbs, endowed with +an inward principle of growth, all we can say is, that +such a conception is really inconceivable. Language +may be conceived as a production, but it cannot be +conceived as a substance that could itself produce. +But the science of language has nothing to do with +mere theories, whether conceivable or not. It collects +facts, and its only object is to account for these facts, +as far as possible. Instead of looking on inflections in +general either as conventional signs or natural excrescences, +it takes each termination by itself, establishes +its most primitive form by means of comparison, +and then treats that primitive syllable as it would treat +<pb n='218'/><anchor id='Pg218'/> +any other part of language,—namely, as something +which was originally intended to convey a meaning. +Whether we are still able to discover the original intention +of every part of language is quite a different +question, and it should be admitted at once that many +grammatical forms, after they have been restored to +their most primitive type, are still without an explanation. +But with every year new discoveries are made +by means of careful inductive reasoning. We become +more familiar every day with the secret ways of language, +and there is no reason to doubt that in the end +grammatical analysis will be as successful as chemical +analysis. Grammar, though sometimes very bewildering +to us in its later stages, is originally a much less +formidable undertaking than is commonly supposed. +What is grammar after all but declension and conjugation? +Originally declension could not have been anything +but the composition of a noun with some other +word expressive of number and case. How the number +was expressed, we saw in a former lecture; and the +same process led to the formation of cases. +</p> + +<p> +Thus the locative is formed in various ways in +Chinese:<note place='foot'> Endlicher, Chinesische Grammatik, p. +172.</note> one is by adding such words as <emph>ćung</emph>, the +middle, or <emph>néi</emph>, inside. Thus, <emph>kûŏ-ćung</emph>, in the empire; +<emph>i sûí ćung</emph>, within a year. The instrumental is formed +by the preposition <emph>ẏ</emph>, which preposition is an old root, +meaning <emph>to use</emph>. Thus <emph>ẏ ting</emph>, with a stick, where in +Latin we should use the ablative, in Greek the dative. +Now, however complicated the declensions, regular and +irregular, may be in Greek and Latin, we may be certain +that originally they were formed by this simple +method of composition. +</p> + +<pb n='219'/><anchor id='Pg219'/> + +<p> +There was originally in all the Aryan languages a +case expressive of locality, which grammarians call the +<emph>locative</emph>. In Sanskrit every substantive has its locative, +as well as its genitive, dative, and accusative. Thus, +<emph>heart</emph> in Sanskrit is <emph>hṛid</emph>; in the heart, is <emph>hṛidi</emph>. +Here, therefore, the termination of the locative is simply short +<emph>i</emph>. This short <emph>i</emph> is a demonstrative root, and in all probability +the same root which in Latin produced the +preposition <emph>in</emph>. The Sanskrit <emph>hṛidi</emph> represents, therefore, +an original compound, as it were, <emph>heart-within</emph>, +which gradually became settled as one of the recognized +cases of nouns ending in consonants. If we look +to Chinese,<note place='foot'>Endlicher, Chinesische +Grammatik, s. 172.</note> we find that the locative is expressed there +in the same manner, but with a greater freedom in the +choice of the words expressive of locality. <q>In the +empire,</q> is expressed by <emph>kûŏ ćung</emph>; <q>within a year,</q> is +expressed by <emph>ĭ sûí ćung</emph>. Instead of <emph>ćung</emph>, however, +we might have employed other terms also, such as, for +instance, <emph>néi</emph>, inside. It might be said that the formation +of so primitive a case as the locative offers little +difficulty, but that this process of composition fails to +account for the origin of the more abstract cases, the +accusative, the dative, and genitive. If we derive our +notions of the cases from philosophical grammar, it is +true, no doubt, that it would be difficult to convey by +a simple composition the abstract relations supposed to +be expressed by the terminations of the genitive, dative, +and accusative. But remember that these are only +general categories under which philosophers and grammarians +endeavored to arrange the facts of language. +The people with whom language grew up knew nothing +of datives and accusatives. Everything that is abstract +<pb n='220'/><anchor id='Pg220'/> +in language was originally concrete. If people wanted +to say the King of Rome, they meant really the King +at Rome, and they would readily have used what I +have just described as the locative; whereas the more +abstract idea of the genitive would never enter into +their system of thought. But more than this, it can +be proved that the locative has actually taken, in some +cases, the place of the genitive. In Latin, for instance, +the old genitive of nouns in <emph>a</emph> was <emph>as</emph>. This we find +still in <emph>pater familiâs</emph>, instead of <emph>pater familiæ</emph>. +The Umbrian and Oscan dialects retained the <emph>s</emph> throughout +as the sign of the genitive after nouns in <emph>a</emph>. The <emph>æ</emph> +of the genitive was originally <emph>ai</emph>, that is to say, the old +locative in <emph>i</emph>. <q>King of Rome,</q> if rendered by <emph>Rex +Romæ</emph>, meant really <q>King at Rome.</q> And here you +will see how grammar, which ought to be the most +logical of all sciences, is frequently the most illogical. +A boy is taught at school, that if he wants to say <q>I +am staying at Rome,</q> he must use the genitive to express +the locative. How a logician or grammarian can +so twist and turn the meaning of the genitive as to +make it express rest in a place, is not for us to inquire; +but, if he succeeded, his pupil would at once use +the genitive of Carthage (Carthaginis) or of Athens +(Athenarum) for the same purpose, and he would then +have to be told that these genitives could not be used +in the same manner as the genitive of nouns in <emph>a.</emph> +How all this is achieved by what is called philosophical +grammar, we know not; but comparative grammar +at once removes all difficulty. It is only in the first +declension that the locative has supplanted the genitive, +whereas <emph>Carthaginis</emph> and <emph>Athenarum</emph>, being real genitives, +could never be employed to express a locative. +<pb n='221'/><anchor id='Pg221'/> +A special case, such as the locative, may be generalized +into the more general genitive, but not <hi rend='italic'>vice versâ</hi>. +</p> + +<p> +You see thus by one instance how what grammarians +call a genitive was formed by the same process +of composition which we can watch in Chinese, and +which we can prove to have taken place in the original +language of the Aryans. And the same applies to the +dative. If a boy is told that the dative expresses a relation +of one object to another, less direct than that of +the accusative, he may well wonder how such a flying +arch could ever have been built up with the scanty +materials which language has at her disposal; but he +will be still more surprised if, after having realized this +grammatical abstraction, he is told that in Greek, in +order to convey the very definite idea of being in a +place, he has to use after certain nouns the termination +of the dative. <q>I am staying at Salamis,</q> must +be expressed by the dative <emph>Salamînĭ</emph>. If you ask why? +Comparative grammar again can alone give an answer. +The termination of the Greek dative in <emph>i</emph>, was originally +the termination of the locative. The locative may well +convey the meaning of the dative, but the faded features +of the dative can never express the fresh distinctness +of the locative. The dative <emph>Salamînĭ</emph> was first a locative. +<q>I live at Salamis,</q> never conveyed the meaning, +<q>I live to Salamis.</q> On the contrary, the dative, +in such phrases as <q>I give it to the father,</q> was originally +a locative; and after expressing at first the palpable +relation of <q>I give it unto the father,</q> or <q>I +place it on or in the father,</q> it gradually assumed the +more general, the less local, less colored aspect which +logicians and grammarians ascribe to their +datives.<note place='foot'><q>The Algonquins have but +one case which may be called locative.</q> Du +Ponceau, p. 158.</note> +</p> + +<pb n='222'/><anchor id='Pg222'/> + +<p> +If the explanation just given of some of the cases +in Greek and Latin should seem too artificial or too +forced, we have only to think of French in order to see +exactly the same process repeated under our eyes. The +most abstract relations of the genitive, as, for instance, +<q>The immortality of the soul</q> (<emph>l'immortalité de l'âme</emph>); +or of the dative, as, for instance, <q>I trust myself to +God</q> (<emph>je me fie à Dieu</emph>), are expressed by prepositions, +such as <emph>de</emph> and <emph>ad</emph>, which in Latin had the distinct +local meanings of <q>down from,</q> and <q>towards.</q> +Nay, the English <emph>of</emph> and <emph>to</emph>, which have taken the +place of the German terminations <emph>s</emph> and <emph>m</emph>, are likewise +prepositions of an originally local character. The +only difference between our cases and those of the ancient +languages consists in this,—that the determining +element is now placed before the word, whereas, in the +original language of the Aryans, it was placed at the +end. +</p> + +<p> +What applies to the cases of nouns, applies with +equal truth to the terminations of verbs. It may seem +difficult to discover in the personal terminations of +Greek and Latin the exact pronouns which were added +to a verbal base in order to express, <emph>I</emph> love, <emph>thou</emph> lovest, +<emph>he</emph> loves; but it stands to reason that originally these +terminations must have been the same in all languages,—namely, +personal pronouns. We may be puzzled by the terminations +of <emph>thou lovest</emph> and <emph>he loves</emph>, where <emph>st</emph> +and <emph>s</emph> can hardly be identified with the modern <emph>thou</emph> +and <emph>he</emph>; but we have only to place all the Aryan dialects +together, and we shall see at once that they point +back to an original set of terminations which can easily +be brought to tell their own story. +</p> + +<p> +Let us begin with modern formations, because we +have here more daylight for watching the intricate and +<pb n='223'/><anchor id='Pg223'/> +sometimes wayward movements of language; or, better +still, let us begin with an imaginary case, or with what +may be called the language of the future, in order to +see quite clearly how, what we should call grammatical +forms, may arise. Let us suppose that the slaves in +America were to rise against their masters, and, after +gaining some victories, were to sail back in large numbers +to some part of Central Africa, beyond the reach +of their white enemies or friends. Let us suppose these +men availing themselves of the lessons they had learnt +in their captivity, and gradually working out a civilization +of their own. It is quite possible that some centuries +hence, a new Livingstone might find among the +descendants of the American slaves, a language, a literature, +laws, and manners, bearing a striking similitude +to those of his own country. What an interesting +problem for any future historian and ethnologist! +Yet there are problems in the past history of the world +of equal interest, which have been and are still to be +solved by the student of language. Now I believe that +a careful examination of the language of the descendants +of those escaped slaves would suffice to determine +with perfect certainty their past history, even though +no documents and no tradition had preserved the story +of their captivity and liberation. At first, no doubt, +the threads might seem hopelessly entangled. A missionary +might surprise the scholars of Europe by an +account of that new African language. He might describe +it at first as very imperfect—as a language, for +instance, so poor that the same word had to be used to +express the most heterogeneous ideas. He might point +out how the same sound, without any change of accent, +meant <emph>true</emph>, a <emph>ceremony</emph>, a +<emph>workman</emph>, and was used also +<pb n='224'/><anchor id='Pg224'/> +as a verb in the sense of literary composition. All +these, he might say, are expressed in that strange dialect +by the sound <emph>rait</emph> (right, rite, wright, write). He +might likewise observe that this dialect, as poor almost +as Chinese, had hardly any grammatical inflections, +and that it had no genders, except in a few words such +as man-of-war, and a railway-engine, which were both +conceived as feminine beings, and spoken of as <emph>she</emph>. +He might then mention an even more extraordinary +feature, namely, that although this language had no +terminations for the masculine and feminine genders of +nouns, it employed a masculine and feminine termination +after the affirmative particle, according as it was +addressed to a lady or a gentleman. Their affirmative +particle being the same as the English, <emph>Yes</emph>, they +added a final <emph>r</emph> to it if addressed to a man, and a final +<emph>m</emph> if addressed to a lady: that is to say, instead of +simply saying, <emph>Yes</emph>, these descendants of the escaped +American slaves said <emph>Yesr</emph> to a man, and <emph>Yesm</emph> to a +lady. +</p> + +<p> +Absurd as this may sound, I can assure you that +the descriptions which are given of the dialects of savage +tribes, as explained for the first time by travellers +or missionaries, are even more extraordinary. But let +us consider now what the student of language would +have to do, if such forms as <emph>Yeśr</emph> and <emph>Yeśm</emph> were, for +the first time, brought under his notice. He would +first have to trace them back historically, as far as possible +to their more original types, and if he discovered +their connection with <emph>Yes Sir</emph> and <emph>Yes Ma'm</emph>, he would +point out how such contractions were most likely to +spring up in a vulgar dialect. After having traced +back the <emph>Yesr</emph> and <emph>Yesm of</emph> the free African negroes +<pb n='225'/><anchor id='Pg225'/> +to the idiom of their former American masters, the +etymologist would next inquire how such phrases as +<emph>Yes Sir</emph> and <emph>Yes Madam</emph>, came to be used on the +American continent. +</p> + +<p> +Finding nothing analogous in the dialects of the aboriginal +inhabitants of America, he would be led, by a +mere comparison of words, to the languages of Europe, +and here again, first to the language of England. Even +if no historical documents had been preserved, the documents +of language would show that the white masters, +whose language the ancestors of the free Africans +adopted during their servitude, came originally from +England, and, within certain limits, it would even be +possible to fix the time when the English language was +first transplanted to America. That language must +have passed, at least, the age of Chaucer before it migrated +to the New World. For Chaucer has two affirmative +particles, <emph>Yea</emph> and <emph>Yes</emph>, and he distinguishes +between the two. He uses <emph>Yes</emph> only in answer to negative +questions. For instance, in answer to <q>Does he +not go?</q> he would say, <emph>Yes</emph>. In all other cases +Chaucer uses <emph>Yea</emph>. To a question, <q>Does he go?</q> +he would answer <emph>Yea</emph>. He observes the same distinction +between <emph>No</emph> and <emph>Nay</emph>, the former being used after +negative, the latter after all other questions. This distinction +became obsolete soon after Sir Thomas More,<note place='foot'>Marsh, p. 579.</note> +and it must have become obsolete before phrases such +as <emph>Yes Sir</emph> and <emph>Yes Madam</emph> could have assumed their +stereotyped character. +</p> + +<p> +But there is still more historical information to be +gained from these phrases. The word <emph>Yes</emph> is Anglo-Saxon, +the same as the German <emph>Ja</emph>, and it therefore +<pb n='226'/><anchor id='Pg226'/> +reveals the fact that the white masters of the American +slaves who crossed the Atlantic after the time of Chaucer, +had crossed the Channel at an earlier period after +leaving the continental fatherland of the Angles and +Saxons. The words <emph>Sir</emph> and <emph>Madam</emph> tell us still more. +They are Norman words, and they could only have +been imposed on the Anglo-Saxons of Britain by Norman +conquerors. They tell us more than this. For +these Normans or Northmen spoke originally a Teutonic +dialect, closely allied to Anglo-Saxon, and in that +dialect words such as <emph>Sir</emph> and <emph>Madam</emph> could never have +sprung up. We may conclude therefore that, previous +to the Norman conquest, the Teutonic Northmen must +have made a sufficiently long stay in one of the Roman +provinces to forget their own and adopt the language +of the Roman Provincials. +</p> + +<p> +We may now trace back the Norman <emph>Madam</emph> to the +French <emph>Madame</emph>, and we recognize in this a corruption +of the Latin <emph>Mea domina</emph>, my mistress. <emph>Domina</emph> was +changed into <emph>domna</emph>, <emph>donna</emph>, and <emph>dame</emph>, and the same +word <emph>Dame</emph> was also used as a masculine in the sense of lord, +as a corruption of <emph>Domino</emph>, <emph>Domno</emph> and <emph>Donno</emph>. The +temporal lord ruling as ecclesiastical seigneur under the +bishop, was called a <emph>vidame</emph>, as the Vidame of Chartres, +&c. The French interjection <emph>Dame!</emph> has no connection +with a similar exclamation in English, but it simply +means Lord! <emph>Dame-Dieu</emph> in old French is Lord God. +A derivative of <emph>Domina</emph>, mistress, was <emph>dominicella</emph>, which +became <emph>Demoiselle</emph> and <emph>Damsel</emph>. The masculine <emph>Dame</emph> +for <emph>Domino</emph>, Lord, was afterwards replaced by the Latin +<emph>Senior</emph>, a translation of the German <emph>elder</emph>. This word +<emph>elder</emph> was a title of honor, and we have it still both in +<emph>alderman</emph>, and in what is originally the same, the English +<pb n='227'/><anchor id='Pg227'/> +<emph>Earl</emph>, the Norse <emph>Jarl</emph>, a corruption of the A.-S. +<emph>ealdor</emph>. This title <emph>Senior</emph>, meaning +originally <emph>older</emph>, was but rarely<note place='foot'>In +Old Portuguese, Diez mentions <emph>senhor rainha, mia sennor formosa</emph>, +my beautiful mistress.</note> applied to ladies as a title of honor. <emph>Senior</emph> +was changed into <emph>Seigneur</emph>, <emph>Seigneur</emph> into <emph>Sieur</emph>, and +<emph>Sieur</emph> soon dwindled down to <emph>Sir</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +Thus we see how in two short phrases, such as <emph>Yesr</emph> +and <emph>Yesm</emph>, long chapters of history might be read. If +a general destruction of books, such as took place in +China under the Emperor Thsin-chi-hoang-ti (213 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi>), +should sweep away all historical documents, language, +even in its most depraved state, would preserve the +secrets of the past, and would tell future generations +of the home and migrations of their ancestors from the +East to the West Indies. +</p> + +<p> +It may seem startling at first to find the same name, +<emph>the East Indies</emph> and <emph>the West Indies</emph>, at the two extremities +of the Aryan migrations; but these very names +are full of historical meaning. They tell us how the +Teutonic race, the most vigorous and enterprising of +all the members of the Aryan family, gave the name +of <emph>West Indies</emph> to the country which in their world-compassing +migrations they imagined to be India itself; +how they discovered their mistake and then distinguished +between the East Indies and West Indies; +how they planted new states in the west, and regenerated +the effete kingdoms in the east; how they +preached Christianity, and at last practised it by abolishing +slavery of body and mind among the slaves of +West-Indian landholders, and the slaves of Brahmanical +soulholders, till they greeted at last the very homes +from which the Aryan family had started when setting +<pb n='228'/><anchor id='Pg228'/> +out on their discovery of the world. All this, and +even more, may be read in the vast archives of language. +The very name of India has a story to tell, +for India is not a native name. We have it from the +Romans, the Romans from the Greeks, the Greeks from +the Persians. And why from the Persians? Because +it is only in Persian that an initial s is changed into <emph>h</emph>, +which initial <emph>h</emph> was as usual dropped in Greek. It is +only in Persian that the country of the <emph>Sindhu</emph> (<emph>sindhu</emph> +is the Sanskrit name for <emph>river</emph>), or of the <emph>seven sindhus</emph>, +could have been called <emph>Hindia</emph> or <emph>India</emph> +instead of <emph>Sindia</emph>. +Unless the followers of Zoroaster had pronounced +every <emph>s</emph> like <emph>h</emph>, we should never have heard of the West +Indies! +</p> + +<p> +We have thus seen by an imaginary instance what +we must be prepared for in the growth of language, +and we shall now better understand why it must be +laid down as a fundamental principle in Comparative +Grammar to look upon nothing in language as +merely formal, till every attempt has been made to +trace the formal elements of language back to their +original and substantial prototypes. We are accustomed +to the idea of grammatical terminations modifying +the meaning of words. But words can be modified +by words only; and though in the present state of +our science it would be too much to say that all grammatical +terminations have been traced back to original +independent words, so many of them have, even in +cases where only a single letter was left, that we may +well lay it down as a rule that all formal elements of +language were originally substantial. Suppose English +had never been written down before the time of Piers +Ploughman. What should we make of such a form as +<pb n='229'/><anchor id='Pg229'/> +<emph>nadistou</emph>,<note place='foot'>Marsh, p. 387. Barnes, Poems in Dorsetshire +Dialect.</note> instead of <emph>ne hadst thou</emph>? <emph>Ne rechi</emph> instead +of <emph>I reck not</emph>? <emph>Al ô'm</emph> in Dorsetshire is <emph>all of +them</emph>. <emph>I midden</emph> is <emph>I may not</emph>; <emph>I cooden</emph>, +<emph>I could not</emph>. Yet the +changes which Sanskrit had undergone before it was +reduced to writing, must have been more considerable +by far than what we see in these dialects. +</p> + +<p> +Let us now look to modern classical languages such +as French and Italian. Most of the grammatical terminations +are the same as in Latin, only changed by +phonetic corruption. Thus <emph>j'aime</emph> is <emph>ego amo</emph>, <emph>tu +aimes</emph>, <emph>tu amas</emph>, <emph>il aime</emph>, <emph>ille amat</emph>. There +was originally a final <emph>t</emph> in French <emph>il aime</emph>, and it comes out +again in such phrases as <emph>aime-t-il?</emph> Thus the French +imperfect corresponds to the Latin imperfect, the Parfait +défini to the Latin perfect. But what about the +French future? There is no similarity between <emph>amabo</emph> +and <emph>j'aimerai</emph>. Here then we have a new grammatical +form, sprung up, as it were, within the recollection +of men; or, at least, in the broad daylight of history. +Now, did the termination <emph>rai</emph> bud forth like a blossom +in spring? or did some wise people meet together to +invent this new termination, and pledge themselves to +use it instead of the old termination <emph>bo</emph>? Certainly +not. We see first of all that in all the Romance +languages the terminations of the future are identical +with the auxiliary verb <emph>to have</emph>.<note place='foot'>Survey +of Languages, p. 21.</note> In French +you find— +</p> + +<lg> +<l>j'ai and je chanter-ai nous avons and nous chanterons.</l> +<l>tu as and tu chanter-as vous avez and vous chanterez.</l> +<l>il a and il chanter-a ils ont and ils chanteront.</l> +</lg> + +<p> +But besides this, we actually find in Spanish and +<pb n='230'/><anchor id='Pg230'/> +Provençal the apparent termination of the future used +as an independent word and not yet joined to the infinitive. +We find in Spanish, instead of <q><emph>lo hare</emph>,</q> I +shall do it, the more primitive form <emph>hacer lo he</emph>; +<hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>, +<emph>facere id habeo</emph>. We find in Provençal, <emph>dir vos ai</emph> instead +of <emph>je vous dirai</emph>; <emph>dir vos em</emph> instead of <emph>nous vous +dirons</emph>. There can be no doubt, therefore, that the +Romance future was originally a compound of the auxiliary +verb <emph>to have</emph> with an infinitive; and <emph>I have to say</emph>, +easily took the meaning of <emph>I shall say</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +Here, then, we see clearly how grammatical forms +arise. A Frenchman looks upon his futures as merely +grammatical forms. He has no idea, unless he is a +scholar, that the terminations of his futures are identical +with the auxiliary verb <emph>avoir</emph>. The Roman had no +suspicion that <emph>amabo</emph> was a compound; but it can be +proved to contain an auxiliary verb as clearly as the +French future. The Latin future was destroyed by +means of phonetic corruption. When the final letters +lost their distinct pronunciation it became impossible to +keep the imperfect <emph>amabam</emph> separate from the future +<emph>amabo</emph>. The future was then replaced by dialectical regeneration, +for the use of <emph>habeo</emph> with an infinitive is found +in Latin, in such expressions as <emph>habeo dicere</emph>, I have to +say, which would imperceptibly glide into I shall +say.<note place='foot'>Fuchs, Romanische Sprachen, s. 344.</note> +In fact, wherever we look we see that, the future is +expressed by means of composition. We have in English +<emph>I shall</emph> and <emph>thou wilt</emph>, which mean originally <emph>I am +bound</emph> and <emph>thou intendest</emph>. In German we use <emph>werden</emph>, +the Gothic <emph>vairthan</emph>, which means originally to go, to +turn towards. In modern Greek we find thelō, I will, +in thelō dōsei, I shall give. In Roumansch we meet +<pb n='231'/><anchor id='Pg231'/> +with <emph>vegnir</emph>, to come, forming the future <emph>veng a vegnir</emph>, +I shall come; whereas in French <emph>je viens de dire</emph>, I +come from saying, is equivalent to <q>I have just said.</q> +The French <emph>je vais dire</emph> is almost a future, though +originally it is <emph>vado dicere</emph>, I go to say. The Dorsetshire, +<q>I be gwâin to goo a-pickèn stuones,</q> is another +case in point. Nor is there any doubt that in +the Latin <emph>bo</emph> of <emph>amabo</emph> we have the old +auxiliary <emph>bhû</emph>, to +be, and in the Greek future in σω, the old auxiliary <emph>as</emph>, +to be.<note place='foot'>The Greek term for the future is ὁ μέλλων, and μέλλω is used as +an auxiliary verb to form certain futures in Greek. It has various meanings, +but they can all be traced back to the Sanskrit <emph>man</emph> (<emph>manyate</emph>), +to think. As <emph>anya</emph>, other, is changed to ἄλλος, so <emph>manye</emph>, +I think, to μέλλω. Il. ii. 39: +θήσειν ἔτ᾽ ἔμελλεν ἐπ ἀλγέα τε στοναchάς τε Τρωσί τε καὶ Δαναοῖσι, <q>he still +thought to lay sufferings on Trojans and Greeks.</q> Il. xxiii. 544: μέλλεις +ἀφαιρήσεσθαι ἄεθλον, <q>thou thinkest thou wouldst have stripped me of the +prize.</q> Od. xiii. 293: οὐκ ἄρ᾽ ἔμελλες λήξειν; <q>did you +not think of stopping?</q> <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> were +you not going to stop? Or again in such phrases as Il. +ii. 36, τὰ οὐ τελέσεσθαι ἔμελλον, <q>these things were not meant to be accomplished,</q> +literally, these things did not mean to be accomplished. Thus +μέλλω was used of things that were likely to be, as if these things themselves +meant or intended to be or not to be; and, the original meaning +being forgotten, μέλλω came to be a mere auxiliary expressing probability. +Μέλλω and μέλλομαι, in the sense of <q>to hesitate,</q> are equally explained +by the Sanskrit <emph>man</emph>, to think or consider. In Old Norse the future is +likewise formed by <emph>mun</emph>, to mean.</note> +</p> + +<p> +We now go back another step, and ask the question +which we asked many times before, How can a mere <emph>d</emph> +produce so momentous a change as that from <emph>I love</emph> to +<emph>I loved</emph>? As we have learnt in the meantime that +English goes back to Anglo-Saxon, and is closely related +to continental Saxon and Gothic, we look at once +to the Gothic imperfect in order to see whether it has +preserved any traces of the original compound; for, +after what we have seen in the previous cases, we +are no doubt prepared to find here, too, grammatical +terminations mere remnants of independent words. +</p> + +<p> +In Gothic there is a verb <emph>nasjan</emph>, to nourish. Its +preterite is as follows:— +</p> + +<table rend="latexcolumns: 'p{2cm} p{2cm} p{2cm}'; tblcolumns: 'lw(15) lw(15) lw(15)'"> +<row><cell>Singular.</cell><cell>Dual.</cell><cell>Plural.</cell></row> +<row><cell>nas-i-da</cell><cell>nas-i-dêdu</cell><cell>nas-i-dêdum.</cell></row> +<row><cell>nas-i-dês</cell><cell>nas-i-dêtuts</cell><cell>nas-i-dêduþ.</cell></row> +<row><cell>nas-i-da</cell><cell>——</cell><cell>nas-i-dedun.</cell></row> +</table> + +<pb n='232'/><anchor id='Pg232'/> + +<p> +The subjunctive of the preterite: +</p> + +<table rend="latexcolumns: 'p{2cm} p{2cm} p{2cm}'; tblcolumns: 'lw(15) lw(15) lw(15)'"> +<row><cell>Singular.</cell><cell>Dual.</cell><cell>Plural.</cell></row> +<row><cell>nas-i-dêdjau</cell><cell>nas-i-dêdeiva</cell><cell>nas-i-dêdeima.</cell></row> +<row><cell>nas-i-dêdeis</cell><cell>nas-i-dêdeits</cell><cell>nas-i-dêdeiþ.</cell></row> +<row><cell>nas-i-dêdi</cell><cell>——</cell><cell>nas-i-dêdeina.</cell></row> +</table> + +<p> +This is reduced in Anglo-Saxon to: +</p> + +<table rend="latexcolumns: 'p{2cm} p{2cm}'; tblcolumns: 'lw(15) lw(15)'"> +<row><cell>Singular.</cell><cell>Plural.</cell></row> +<row><cell>ner-ë-de</cell><cell>ner-ë-don.</cell></row> +<row><cell>ner-ë-dest</cell><cell>ner-ë-don.</cell></row> +<row><cell>ner-ë-de</cell><cell>ner-ë-don.</cell></row> +</table> + +<p> +Subjunctive: +</p> + +<table rend="latexcolumns: 'p{2cm} p{2cm}'; tblcolumns: 'lw(15) lw(15)'"> +<row><cell>ner-ë-de</cell><cell>ner-ë-don.</cell></row> +<row><cell>ner-ë-de</cell><cell>ner-ë-don.</cell></row> +<row><cell>ner-ë-de</cell><cell>ner-ë-don.</cell></row> +</table> + +<p> +Let us now look to the auxiliary verb <emph>to do</emph>, in Anglo-Saxon: +</p> + +<table rend="latexcolumns: 'p{2cm} p{2cm}'; tblcolumns: 'lw(15) lw(15)'"> +<row><cell>Singular.</cell><cell>Plural.</cell></row> +<row><cell>dide</cell><cell>didon.</cell></row> +<row><cell>didest</cell><cell>didon.</cell></row> +<row><cell>dide</cell><cell>didon.</cell></row> +</table> + +<p> +If we had only the Anglo-Saxon preterite <emph>nerëde</emph> and the +Anglo-Saxon <emph>dide</emph>, the identity of the <emph>de</emph> in <emph>nerëde</emph> +with <emph>dide</emph> would not be very apparent. But here you +will perceive the advantage which Gothic has over all +other Teutonic dialects for the purposes of grammatical +comparison and analysis. It is in Gothic, and in Gothic +in the plural only, that the full auxiliary <emph>dêdum</emph>, <emph>dêduþ</emph>, +<emph>dêdun</emph> has been preserved. In the Gothic singular +<emph>nasida</emph>, <emph>nasidês</emph>, <emph>nasida</emph> stand +for <emph>nasideda</emph>, <emph>nasidedês</emph>, +<pb n='233'/><anchor id='Pg233'/> +<emph>nasideda</emph>. The same contraction has taken place in +Anglo-Saxon, not only in the singular but in the plural +also. Yet, such is the similarity between Gothic and +Anglo-Saxon that we cannot doubt their preterites +having been formed on the same last. If there be +any truth in inductive reasoning, there must have been +an original Anglo-Saxon preterite,<note place='foot'>Bopp, Comp. +Grammar, § 620. Grimm, German Grammar, ii. 845.</note> +</p> + +<table rend="latexcolumns: 'p{2cm} p{2cm}'; tblcolumns: 'lw(15) lw(15)'"> +<row><cell>Singular.</cell><cell>Plural.</cell></row> +<row><cell>ner-ë-dide</cell><cell>ner-ë-didon.</cell></row> +<row><cell>ner-ë-didest</cell><cell>ner-ë-didon.</cell></row> +<row><cell>ner-ë-dide</cell><cell>ner-ë-didon.</cell></row> +</table> + +<p> +And as <emph>ner-ë-dide</emph> dwindled down to <emph>nerëde</emph>, +so <emph>nerëde</emph> +would, in modern English, become <emph>nered</emph>. The <emph>d</emph> of +the preterite, therefore, which changes <emph>I love</emph> into <emph>I +loved</emph> is originally the auxiliary verb <emph>to do</emph>, and <emph>I loved</emph> +is the same as <emph>I love did</emph>, or <emph>I did love</emph>. In English +dialects, as, for instance, in the Dorset dialect, every +preterite, if it expresses a lasting or repeated action, is +formed by <emph>I did</emph>,<note place='foot'>Barnes, +Dorsetshire Dialect, p. 39.</note> and a distinction is thus established +between <q>'e died eesterdae,</q> and <q>the vo'ke did die by +scores;</q> though originally <emph>died</emph> is the same as <emph>die did</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +It might be asked, however, very properly, how <emph>did</emph> +itself, or the Anglo-Saxon <emph>dide</emph>, was formed, and how it +received the meaning of a preterite. In <emph>dide</emph> the final +<emph>de</emph> is not termination, but it is the root, and the first +syllable <emph>di</emph> is a reduplication of the root, the fact being +that all preterites of old, or, as they are called, strong +verbs, were formed as in Greek and Sanskrit by means +of reduplication, reduplication being one of the principal +means by which roots were invested with a verbal +character.<note place='foot'>See M. M.'s Letter on the Turanian +Languages, pp. 44, 46.</note> The root <emph>do</emph> in Anglo-Saxon is the same +<pb n='234'/><anchor id='Pg234'/> +as the root <emph>thē</emph> in <emph>tithēmi</emph> in Greek, and the Sanskrit +root <emph>dhâ</emph> in <emph>dadâdmi</emph>. Anglo-Saxon <emph>dide</emph> would +therefore correspond to Sanskrit <emph>dadhau</emph>, I placed. +</p> + +<p> +Now, in this manner, the whole, or nearly the whole, +grammatical framework of the Aryan or Indo-European +languages has been traced back to original independent +words, and even the slightest changes which at first +sight seem so mysterious, such as <emph>foot</emph> into <emph>feet</emph>, or <emph>I +find</emph> into <emph>I found</emph>, have been fully accounted for. This +is what is called comparative grammar, or a scientific +analysis of all the formal elements of a language preceded +by a comparison of all the varieties which one and +the same form has assumed in the numerous dialects of +the Aryan family. The most important dialects for +this purpose are Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, and Gothic; +but in many cases Zend, or Celtic, or Slavonic dialects +come in to throw an unexpected light on forms unintelligible +in any of the four principal dialects. The result +of such a work as Bopp's <q>Comparative Grammar</q> +of the Aryan languages may be summed up in a few +words. The whole framework of grammar—the elements +of derivation, declension, and conjugation—had +become settled before the separation of the Aryan +family. Hence the broad outlines of grammar, in Sanskrit, +Greek, Latin, Gothic, and the rest, are in reality +the same; and the apparent differences can be explained +by phonetic corruption, which is determined by the +phonetic peculiarities of each nation. On the whole, +the history of all the Aryan languages is nothing but a +gradual process of decay. After the grammatical terminations +of all these languages have been traced back +to their most primitive form, it is possible, in many instances, +to determine their original meaning. This, +<pb n='235'/><anchor id='Pg235'/> +however, can be done by means of induction only; and +the period during which, as in the Provençal <emph>dir vos ai</emph>, +the component elements of the old Aryan grammar +maintained a separate existence in the language and +the mind of the Aryans had closed, before Sanskrit was +Sanskrit or Greek Greek. That there was such a +period we can doubt as little as we can doubt the real +existence of fern forests previous to the formation of +our coal fields. We can do even more. Suppose we +had no remnants of Latin; suppose the very existence +of Rome and of Latin were unknown to us; we might +still prove, on the evidence of the six Romance dialects, +that there must have been a time when these dialects +formed the language of a small settlement; nay, by +collecting the words which all these dialects share in +common, we might, to a certain extent, reconstruct the +original language, and draw a sketch of the state of +civilization, as reflected by these common words. The +same can be done if we compare Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, +Gothic, Celtic, and Slavonic. The words which have +as nearly as possible the same form and meaning in all +the languages must have existed before the people, who +afterwards formed the prominent nationalities of the +Aryan family, separated; and, if carefully interpreted, +they, too, will serve as evidence as to the state of civilization +attained by the Aryans before they left their +common home. It can be proved, by the evidence of +language, that before their separation the Aryans led +the life of agricultural nomads,—a life such as Tacitus +describes that of the ancient Germans. They knew the +arts of ploughing, of making roads, of building ships, of +weaving and sewing, of erecting houses; they had +counted at least as far as one hundred. They had domesticated +<pb n='236'/><anchor id='Pg236'/> +the most important animals, the cow, the +horse, the sheep, the dog; they were acquainted with +the most useful metals, and armed with iron hatchets, +whether for peaceful or warlike purposes. They had +recognized the bonds of blood and the bonds of marriage; +they followed their leaders and kings, and the +distinction between right and wrong was fixed by laws +and customs. They were impressed with the idea of +a divine Being, and they invoked it by various names. +All this, as I said, can be proved by the evidence of +language. For if you find that languages like Greek, +Latin, Gothic, Celtic, or Slavonic, which, after their +first separation, have had but little contact with Sanskrit, +have the same word, for instance, for <emph>iron</emph> which +exists in Sanskrit, this is proof absolute that iron was +known previous to the Aryan separation. Now, <emph>iron</emph> +is <emph>ais</emph> in Gothic, and <emph>ayas</emph> in Sanskrit, a word which, as +it could not have been borrowed by the Indians from +the Germans or by the Germans from the Indians, +must have existed previous to their separation. We +could not find the same name for house in Sanskrit, +Greek, Latin, Slavonic, and Celtic,<note place='foot'>Sk. <emph>dama</emph>; Gr. δόμος; +L. <emph>domus</emph>; Slav. <emph>domü</emph>; Celt. <emph>daimh</emph>.</note> +unless houses had +been known before the separation of these dialects. In +this manner a history of Aryan civilization has been +written from the archives of language, stretching back +to times far beyond the reach of any documentary +history.<note place='foot'>See M. M.'s Essay on Comparative +Mythology, Oxford Essays, 1856.</note> +</p> + +<p> +The very name of <emph>Arya</emph> belongs to this history, and +I shall devote the rest of this lecture to tracing the +origin and gradual spreading of this old word. I had +intended to include, in to-day's lecture, a short account +<pb n='237'/><anchor id='Pg237'/> +of <emph>comparative mythology</emph>, a branch of our science which +restores the original form and meaning of decayed words +by the same means by which comparative grammar recovers +the original form and meaning of terminations. +But my time is too limited; and, as I have been asked +repeatedly why I applied the name of <emph>Aryan</emph> to that +family of language which we have just examined, I feel +that I am bound to give an answer. +</p> + +<p> +<emph>Ârya</emph> is a Sanskrit word, and in the later Sanskrit it +means <emph>noble</emph>, <emph>of a good family</emph>. It was, however, originally +a national name, and we see traces of it as late as +the Law-book of the Mânavas, where India is still +called <emph>Ârya-âvarta</emph>, the abode of the +<emph>Âryas</emph>.<note place='foot'>Ârya-bhûmi, and Ârya-deśa are +used in the same sense.</note> In the +old Sanskrit, in the hymns of the Veda, <emph>ârya</emph> occurs +frequently as a national name and as a name of honor, +comprising the worshippers of the gods of the Brahmans, +as opposed to their enemies, who are called in +the Veda <emph>Dasyus</emph>. Thus one of the gods, <emph>Indra</emph>, who, +in some respects, answers to the Greek Zeus, is invoked +in the following words (Rigveda, i. 57, 8): <q>Know thou +the Âryas, O Indra, and they who are Dasyus; punish +the lawless, and deliver them unto thy servant! Be +thou the mighty helper of the worshippers, and I will +praise all these thy deeds at the festivals.</q> +</p> + +<p> +In the later dogmatic literature of the Vedic age, +the name of Ârya is distinctly appropriated to the +three first castes—the Brahmans, Kshatriyas, Vaiśyas—as +opposed to the fourth, or the Śûdras. In the +Śatapatha-Brâhmaņa it is laid down distinctly: <q>Âryas +are only the Brahmans, the Kshatriyas, and Vaiśyas, +for they are admitted to the sacrifices. They shall not +speak with everybody, but only with the Brahman, the +<pb n='238'/><anchor id='Pg238'/> +Kshatriya, and the Vaiśya. If they should fall into a +conversation with a Śûdra, let them say to another +man, <q>Tell this Śûdra so.</q> This is the law.</q> +</p> + +<p> +In the Atharva-veda (iv. 20, 4; xix. 62, 1) expressions +occur such as, <q>seeing all things, whether Śûdra +or Ârya,</q> where Śûdra and Ârya are meant to express +the whole of mankind. +</p> + +<p> +This word <emph>ârya</emph> with a long <emph>â</emph> is derived from <emph>arya</emph> +with a short <emph>a</emph>, and this name <emph>arya</emph> is applied in the +later Sanskrit to a Vaiśya, or a member of the third +caste.<note place='foot'>Pân. iii. 1, 103.</note> +What is called the third class must originally +have constituted the large majority of the Brahmanic +society, for all who were not soldiers or priests, were +Vaiśyas. We may well understand, therefore, how a +name, originally applied to the cultivators of the soil +and householders, should in time have become a general +name for all Aryans.<note place='foot'>In one of the Vedas, +<emph>arya</emph> with a short <emph>a</emph> is used like <emph>ârya</emph>, as opposed +to Śûdra. For we read (Vâj-San. xx. 17): <q>Whatever sin we have committed +in the village, in the forest, in the home, in the open air, against a +Śûdra, against an Arya,—thou art our deliverance.</q></note> Why the householders +were called <emph>arya</emph> is a question which would carry us +too far at present. I can only state that the etymological +signification of Arya seems to be <q>one who ploughs +or tills,</q> and that it is connected with the root of <emph>arare</emph>. +The Aryans would seem to have chosen this name for +themselves as opposed to the nomadic races, <emph>the Turanians</emph>, +whose original name <emph>Tura</emph> implies the swiftness +of the horseman. +</p> + +<p> +In India, as we saw, the name of Ârya, as a national +name, fell into oblivion in later times, and was +preserved only in the term Âryâvarta, the abode of +the Aryans. But it was more faithfully preserved +<pb n='239'/><anchor id='Pg239'/> +by the Zoroastrians who migrated from India to the +north-west, and whose religion has been preserved to +us in the Zend-avesta, though in fragments only. Now +<emph>Airya</emph> in Zend means venerable, and is at the same +time the name of the people.<note place='foot'>Lassen, Ind. +Alt. b. i. s. 6.</note> In the first chapter of +the Vendidád, where Ahuramazda explains to Zarathustra +the order in which he created the earth, sixteen +countries are mentioned, each, when created by +Ahuramazda, being pure and perfect; but each being +tainted in turn by Angro mainyus or Ahriman. Now +the first of these countries is called <emph>Airyanem vaêjô</emph>, +<emph>Arianum semen</emph>, the Aryan seed, and its position must +have been as far east as the western slopes of the Belurtag +and Mustag, near the sources of the Oxus and +Yaxartes, the highest elevation of Central +Asia.<note place='foot'>Ibid. b. i. s. 526.</note> From +this country, which is called their seed, the Aryans advanced +towards the south and west, and in the Zend-avesta +the whole extent of country occupied by the +Aryans is likewise called <emph>Airyâ</emph>. A line drawn from +India along the Paropamisus and Caucasus Indicus +in the east, following in the north the direction +between the Oxus and Yaxartes,<note place='foot'>Ptolemy +knows Ἀριάκαι, near the mouth of the Yaxartes. Ptol. vi. +14; Lassen, loc. cit. i. 6.</note> then running along +the Caspian Sea, so as to include Hyrcania and Râgha, +then turning south-east on the borders of Nisaea, Aria +(<hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> Haria), and the countries washed by the Etymandrus +and Arachotus, would indicate the general +horizon of the Zoroastrian world. It would be what +is called in the fourth cardé of the Yasht of Mithra, +<q>the whole space of Aria,</q> <emph>vîśpem airyô-śayanem</emph> (totum +Ariæ situm).<note place='foot'>Burnouf, Yaśna, notes, 61. In the same sense the +Zend-avesta uses the expression, Aryan provinces, <q>airyanâm daqyunâm</q> gen. plur., or +<q>airyâo dainhâvô,</q> provincias Arianas. Burnouf, Yaśna, 442; and +Notes, p. 70</note> Opposed to the Aryan we find in +<pb n='240'/><anchor id='Pg240'/> +the Zend-avesta the non-Aryan countries (anairyâo +dainhâvô),<note place='foot'>Burnouf, Notes, p. 62.</note> +and traces of this name are found in the +Ἀναριάκαι, a people and town on the frontiers of +Hyrcania.<note place='foot'>Strabo, xi. 7, 11. Plin. Hist. Nat. vi. 19. Ptol. vi. 2. +De Sacy, Mémoires sur diverses antiquités de la Perse, p. 48. Lassen, Indische +Alterthumskunde, i. 6.</note> +Greek geographers use the name of Ariana +in a wider sense even than the Zend-avesta. All the +country between the Indian Ocean in the south and +the Indus in the east, the Hindu-kush and Paropamisus +in the north, the Caspian gates, Karamania, and +the mouth of the Persian gulf in the west, is included +by Strabo (xv. 2) under the name of Ariana; and +Bactria is thus called<note place='foot'>Strabo. +xi. 11; Burnouf, Notes, p. 110. <q>In another place Eratosthenes +is cited as describing the western boundary to be a line separating Parthiene +from Media, and Karmania from Parætakene and Persia, thus taking +in Yezd and Kerman, but excluding Fars.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Wilson, +Ariana antiqua</hi>, +p. 120.</note> by him <q>the ornament of the +whole of Ariana.</q> As the Zoroastrian religion spread +westward, Persia, Elymais, and Media all claimed for +themselves the Aryan title. Hellanicus, who wrote +before Herodotus, knows of Aria as a name of +Persia.<note place='foot'>Hellanicus, fragm. 166, ed. Müller. Ἄρια Περσικὴ χώρα.</note> +Herodotus (vii. 62) attests that the Medians called +themselves Arii; and even for Atropatene, the northernmost +part of Media, the name of Ariania (not Aria) +has been preserved by Stephanus Byzantinus. As to +Elymais its name has been derived from <emph>Ailama</emph>, a +supposed corruption of <emph>Airyama</emph>.<note place='foot'>Joseph +Müller, Journal Asiatique, 1839, p. 298. Lassen, loc. cit. i. 6. +From this the Elam of Genesis. Mélanges Asiatiques, i. p. +623.</note> The Persians, Medians, +Bactrians, and Sogdians all spoke, as late as the +<pb n='241'/><anchor id='Pg241'/> +time of Strabo,<note place='foot'>Heeren, Ideen, i. +p. 337: ὁμόγλωττοι παρὰ μικρόν. Strabo, p. 1054.</note> nearly the same language, and we +may well understand, therefore, that they should have +claimed for themselves one common name, in opposition +to the hostile tribes of Turan. +</p> + +<p> +That <emph>Aryan</emph> was used as a title of honor in the Persian +empire is clearly shown by the cuneiform inscriptions +of Darius. He calls himself <emph>Ariya</emph> and <emph>Ariya-chitra</emph>, +an Aryan and of Aryan descent; and Ahuramazda, +or, as he is called by Darius, Auramazda, is +rendered in the Turanian translation of the inscription +of Behistun, <q>the god of the Aryans.</q> Many historical +names of the Persians contain the same element. +The great-grandfather of Darius is called in the inscriptions +Ariyârâmna, the Greek <emph>Ariaramnēs</emph> (Herod, vii. +90). Ariobarzanēs (<hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> Euergetēs), +Ariomanes (<hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> +Eumenēs), Ariomardos, all show the same origin.<note place='foot'>One +of the Median classes is called Ἀριζαντοί, which may be <emph>âryajantu</emph>. +Herod, i. 101.</note> +</p> + +<p> +About the same time as these inscriptions, Eudemos, +a pupil of Aristotle, as quoted by Damascius, speaks +of <q>the Magi and the whole Aryan race,</q><note place='foot'>Μάγοι +δὲ καὶ πὰν τὸ Ἄρειον γένος, ὡς καὶ τοῦτο γράφει ὁ Εὔδημος, οἱ +μὲν, τόπον, οἱ δὲ χρόνον καλοῦσι τὸ νοητὸν ἅπαν καὶ τὸ ἡνωμένον; ἐξ οὐ +διακριθῆναι ἡ θεὸν ἀγαθὸν καὶ δαίμονα κακὸν ἢ φῶς καὶ σκότος πρὸ τούτων, +ὡσ ἐνίους λέγειν. Οὐτοι δὲ οὖν καὶ αὐτοὶ μετὰ τὴν ἀδιάκριτον φύσιν διακρινομένην +ποιοῦσι τὴν διττὴν συστοιχὴν τῶν κρειττόνων, τῆς μὲν ἡγεῖσθαι +τὸν Ὀρομάσδη, τῆς δὲ τὸν Ἀρειμάνιον.—Damascius, quæstiones de primis +principiis, ed. Kopp, 1826, cap. 125, p. 384.</note> evidently +using Aryan in the same sense in which the Zend-avesta +spoke of <q>the whole country of Aria.</q> +</p> + +<p> +And when, after years of foreign invasion and occupation, +Persia rose again under the sceptre of the Sassanians +to be a national kingdom, we find the new +national kings the worshippers of Masdanes, calling +<pb n='242'/><anchor id='Pg242'/> +themselves, in the inscriptions deciphered by De +Sacy,<note place='foot'>De Sacy, Mémoire, p. 47; Lassen, Ind. Alt. i. 8.</note> +<q>Kings of the Aryan and un-Aryan races;</q> in Pehlevi, +<emph>Irân va Anirân</emph>; in Greek, Ἀριάνων καὶ Ἀναριάνων. +</p> + +<p> +The modern name of Irán for Persia still keeps up +the memory of this ancient title. +</p> + +<p> +In the name of <emph>Armenia</emph> the same element of <emph>Arya</emph> +has been supposed to exist.<note place='foot'>Burnouf, +Notes, 107. Spiegel, Beiträge zur Vergl. Sprachf. i. 131. +Anquetil had no authority for taking the Zend +<emph>airyaman</emph> for Armenia.</note> The name of Armenia, +however, does not occur in Zend, and the name +<emph>Armina</emph>, which is used for Armenia in the cuneiform +inscriptions, is of doubtful etymology.<note place='foot'>Bochart +shows (Phaleg, l. 1, c. 3, col. 20) that the Chaldee paraphrast +renders the Minî of Jeremiah by Har Minî, and as the same country is +called Minyas by Nicolaus Damascenus, he infers that the first syllable is +the Semitic Har, a mountain. (See Rawlinson's Glossary, s. v.)</note> In the language +of Armenia, <emph>ari</emph> is used in the widest sense for Aryan +or Iranian; it means also brave, and is applied more +especially to the Medians.<note place='foot'>Lassen, Ind. +Alt. i. 8, note. <emph>Arikh</emph> also is used in Armenian as the +name of the Medians, and has been referred by Jos. Müller to Aryaka, as a +name of Media. Journ. As. 1839, p. 298. If, as Quatremère says, <emph>ari</emph> and +<emph>anari</emph> are used in Armenian for Medians and Persians, this can only be +ascribed to a misunderstanding, and must be a phrase of later +date.</note> The word <emph>arya</emph>, therefore, +though not contained in the name of Armenia, can be +proved to have existed in the Armenian language as a +national and honorable name. +</p> + +<p> +West of Armenia, on the borders of the Caspian +Sea, we find the ancient name of <emph>Albania</emph>. The Armenians +call the Albanians <emph>Aghovan</emph>, and as <emph>gh</emph> in +Armenian stands for <emph>r</emph> or <emph>l</emph>, it has been conjectured by +Boré, that in <emph>Aghovan</emph> also the name of Aria is contained. +This seems doubtful. But in the valleys of +the Caucasus we meet with an Aryan race speaking an +<pb n='243'/><anchor id='Pg243'/> +Aryan language, the <emph>Os</emph> of <emph>Ossethi</emph>, and they call themselves +<emph>Iron</emph>.<note place='foot'>Sjögren, Ossetic Grammar, p. +396. Scylax and Apollodorus mention +Ἄριοι and Ἀριάνια, south of the Caucasus. Pictet, Origines, 67; Scylax +Perip. p. 213, ed. Klausen; Apollodori Biblioth. p. 433, ed. Heyne.</note> +</p> + +<p> +Along the Caspian, and in the country washed by +the Oxus and Yaxartes, Aryan and non-Aryan tribes +were mingled together for centuries. Though the relation +between Aryans and Turanians is hostile, and +though there were continual wars between them, as we +learn from the great Persian epic, the Shahnámeh, it +does not follow that all the nomad races who infested +the settlements of the Aryans, were of Tatar blood +and speech. Turvaśa and his descendants, who represent +the Turanians, are described in the later epic +poems of India as cursed and deprived of their inheritance +in India. But in the Vedas Turvaśa is represented +as worshipping Aryan gods. Even in the Shahnámeh, +Persian heroes go over to the Turanians and +lead them against Iran, very much as Coriolanus led +the Samnites against Rome. We may thus understand +why so many Turanian or Scythian names, mentioned +by Greek writers, should show evident traces of Aryan +origin. <emph>Aspa</emph> was the Persian name for <emph>horse</emph>, and in +the Scythian names <emph>Aspabota</emph>, <emph>Aspakara</emph>, +and <emph>Asparatha</emph>,<note place='foot'>Burnouf, Notes, p. 105.</note> +we can hardly fail to recognize the same element. +Even the name of the Aspasian mountains, placed by +Ptolemy in Scythia, indicates a similar origin. Nor is +the word Arya unknown beyond the Oxus. There is +a people called <emph>Ariacœ</emph>,<note place='foot'>Ptol. +vi. 2, and vi. 14. There are Ἀναριάκαι on the frontiers of Hyrcania. +Strabo, xi. 7; Pliny, Hist. Nat. vi. 19.</note> another called +<emph>Antariani</emph>.<note place='foot'>On Arimaspi and +Aramæi, see Burnouf, Notes, p. 105; Plin. vi. 9.</note> A +<pb n='244'/><anchor id='Pg244'/> +king of the Scythians, at the time of Darius, was called +<emph>Ariantes</emph>. A cotemporary of Xerxes is known by the +name of <emph>Aripithes</emph> (<hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> +Sanskrit, <emph>aryapati</emph>; Zend, <emph>airyapaiti</emph>); +and <emph>Spargapithes</emph> seems to have some connection +with the Sanskrit <emph>svargapati</emph>, lord of heaven. +</p> + +<p> +We have thus traced the name of <emph>Ârya</emph> from India +to the west, from Âryâvarta to Ariana, Persia, Media, +more doubtfully to Armenia and Albania, to the Iron +in the Caucasus, and to some of the nomad tribes in +Transoxiana. As we approach Europe the traces of +this name grow fainter, yet they are not altogether +lost. +</p> + +<p> +Two roads were open to the Aryans of Asia in their +westward migrations. One through Chorasan<note place='foot'><emph>Qairizam</emph> +in the Zend-avesta, <emph>Uvârazmis</emph> in the inscriptions of Darius.</note> to the +north, through what is now called Russia, and thence +to the shores of the Black Sea and Thrace. Another +from Armenia, across the Caucasus or across the Black +Sea to Northern Greece, and along the Danube to +Germany. Now on the former road the Aryans left a +trace of their migration in the old name of Thrace +which was <emph>Aria</emph>;<note place='foot'>Stephanus +Byzantinus.</note> on the latter we meet in the eastern +part of Germany, near the Vistula, with a German +tribe called <emph>Arii</emph>. And as in Persia we found many +proper names in which <emph>Arya</emph> formed an important ingredient, +so we find again in German history names +such as <emph>Ariovistus</emph>.<note place='foot'>Grimm, Rechts +alterthümer, p. 292, traces Arii and Ariovistus back to +the Gothic <emph>harji</emph>, army. If this is right, this part of our argument must be +given up.</note> +</p> + +<p> +Though we look in vain for any traces of this old +national name among the Greeks and Romans, late +researches have rendered it at least plausible that it has +<pb n='245'/><anchor id='Pg245'/> +been preserved in the extreme west of the Aryan migrations, +in the very name of <emph>Ireland</emph>. The common +etymology of <emph>Erin</emph> is that it means <q>island of the west,</q> +<emph>iar-innis</emph>, or land of the west, <emph>iar-in</emph>. But this is clearly +wrong.<note place='foot'>Pictet, Les Origines Indo-Européennes, p. 31. +<q><emph>Iar</emph>, l'ouest, ne s'écrit jamais <emph>er</emph> ou <emph>eir</emph>, +et la forme <emph>Iarin</emph> ne se rencontre nulle part pour Erin.</q> +Zeuss gives <emph>iar-rend</emph>, insula occidentalis. But <emph>rend</emph> +(recte <emph>rind</emph>) makes <emph>rendo</emph> in the gen. sing.</note> +The old name is <emph>Ériu</emph> in the nominative, more +recently <emph>Éire</emph>. It is only in the oblique cases that the +final <emph>n</emph> appears, as in <emph>regio</emph>, +<emph>regionis</emph>. <emph>Erin</emph> therefore +has been explained as a derivative of <emph>Er</emph> or <emph>Eri</emph>, said +to be the ancient name of the Irish Celts as preserved +in the Anglo-Saxon name of their country, +<emph>Íraland</emph>.<note place='foot'>Old Norse <emph>írar</emph>, +Irishmen, Anglo-Saxon <emph>ira</emph>, Irishman.</note> +It is maintained by O'Reilly, though denied by others, +that <emph>er</emph> is used in Irish in the sense of noble, like the +Sanskrit <emph>ârya</emph>.<note place='foot'><p>Though +I state these views on the authority of M. Pictet, I think it +right to add the following note which an eminent Irish scholar has had the +kindness to send me:—<q rend='pre'>The ordinary name of Ireland, in the oldest Irish +MSS., is (<emph>h</emph>)<emph>ériu</emph>, gen. (<emph>h</emph>)<emph>érenn</emph>, +dat. (<emph>h</emph>)<emph>érinn</emph>. The initial <emph>h</emph>, is often omitted. +Before etymologizing on the word, we must try to fix its Old Celtic form. +Of the ancient names of Ireland which are found in Greek and Latin +writers, the only one which <emph>hériu</emph> can +formally represent is <emph>Hiberio</emph>. The +abl. sing. of this form—<emph>Hiberione</emph>—is +found in the Book of Armagh, a +Latin MS. of the early part of the ninth century. From the same MS. we +also learn that a name of the Irish people was <emph>Hyberionaces</emph>, which is +obviously a derivative from the stem of <emph>Hiberio</emph>. Now if we remember that +the Old Irish scribes often prefixed <emph>h</emph> +to words beginning with a vowel (<hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi> +<emph>h-abunde</emph>, <emph>h-arundo</emph>, <emph>h-erimus</emph>, +<emph>h-ostium</emph>), and that they also often wrote <emph>b</emph> for +the <emph>v</emph> consonant (<hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi> <emph>bobes</emph>, +<emph>fribulas</emph>, <emph>corbus</emph>, <emph>fabonius</emph>); if, moreover, we +observe that the Welsh and Breton names for Ireland—<emph>Ywerddon</emph>, +<emph>Iverdon</emph>—point to an Old Celtic name beginning with +<emph>iver</emph>—, we shall have little difficulty in giving +<emph>Hiberio</emph> a correctly latinized form, viz. <emph>Iverio</emph>. This +in Old Celtic would be <emph>Iveriu</emph>, gen. <emph>Iverionos</emph>. So the +Old Celtic form of <emph>Fronto</emph> was <emph>Frontû</emph>, as we see from the +Gaulish inscription at Vieux Poitiers. As <emph>v</emph> when flanked by vowels is +always lost in Irish, <emph>Iveriû</emph> would +become <emph>ieriu</emph>, and then, the first two vowels +running together, <emph>ériu</emph>. As +regards the double <emph>n</emph> in the oblique cases of +<emph>ériu</emph>, the genitive <emph>érenn</emph> (<hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi>) +is to <emph>Iverionos</emph> as the Old Irish <emph>anmann</emph> +<q>names</q> is to the Skr. <emph>nâmâni</emph>, Lat. +<emph>nomina</emph>. The doubling of the <emph>n</emph> may perhaps be due to the Old +Celtic accent. What then is the etymology of <emph>Iveriû</emph>? I venture to think that +it may (like the Lat. <emph>Aver-nus</emph>, Gr. Ἄφορ-νος) be connected with the Skr. +<emph>avara</emph>, <q>posterior,</q> <q>western.</q> +So the Irish <emph>des</emph>, Welsh <emph>deheu</emph>, <q>right,</q> +<q>south,</q> is the Skr. <emph>dakshina</emph>, <q>dexter,</q> and the +Irish <emph>áir</emph> (in <emph>an-áir</emph>), if it +stand for <emph>páir</emph>, <q>east,</q> is the Skr. <emph>pûrva</emph>, +<q>anterior.</q></q> +</p> +<p> +<q>M. Pictet regards Ptolemy's Ἰουερνια (Ivernia) as coming nearest to the +Old Celtic form of the name in question. He further sees in the first syllable +what he calls the Irish <emph>ibh</emph>, <q>land,</q> <q>tribe of people,</q> +and he thinks that this <emph>ibh</emph> may be +connected not only with the Vedic <emph>ibha</emph>, <q>family,</q> but with the +Old High German <emph>eiba</emph>, <q>a district.</q> But, first, according to the Irish +phonetic laws, <emph>ibha</emph> would have appeared as <emph>eb</emph> in Old, +<emph>eabh</emph> in Modern-Irish. Secondly, the <emph>ei</emph> in <emph>eiba</emph> is +a diphthong = Gothic <emph>ái</emph>, Irish <emph>ói</emph>, <emph>óe</emph>, Skr. +<emph>ê</emph>. Consequently <emph>ibh</emph> and <emph>ibha</emph> cannot be identified +with <emph>eiba</emph>. Thirdly, there is no +such word as <emph>ibh</emph> in the nom. sing., although it is to be found in O'Reilly's +dictionary, along with his explanation of the intensive prefix <emph>er</emph>—, as +<q>noble,</q> and many other blunders and forgeries. The form <emph>ibh</emph> is, no +doubt, producible, but it is a very modern dative plural of <emph>úa</emph>, <q>a +descendant.</q> Irish districts were often called by the names of the occupying clans. +These clans were often called <q>descendants (<emph>huí</emph>, <emph>hí</emph>, +<emph>í</emph>) of such an one.</q> +Hence the blunder of the Irish lexicographer.</q>—W. S.</p></note> +</p> + +<pb n='246'/><anchor id='Pg246'/> + +<p> +Some of the evidence here collected in tracing the +ancient name of the Aryan family, may seem doubtful, +and I have pointed out myself some links of the chain +uniting the earliest name of India with the modern +name of Ireland, as weaker than the rest. But the +principal links are safe. Names of countries, peoples, +rivers, and mountains, have an extraordinary vitality, +and they will remain while cities, kingdoms, and nations +pass away. <emph>Rome</emph> has the same name to-day, and +will probably have it forever, which was given to it by +the earliest Latin and Sabine settlers, and wherever we +find the name of Rome, whether in Wallachia, which +by the inhabitants is called Rumania, or in the dialects +of the Grisons, the Romansch, or in the title of the +Romance languages, we know that some threads would +lead us back to the Rome of Romulus and Remus, the +stronghold of the earliest warriors of Latium. The +ruined city near the mouth of the Upper Zab, now +<pb n='247'/><anchor id='Pg247'/> +usually known by the name of Nimrud, is called <emph>Athur</emph> +by the Arabic geographers, and in Athur we recognize +the old name of Assyria, which Dio Cassius writes Atyria, +remarking that the barbarians changed the Sigma +into Tau. Assyria is called Athurâ, in the inscriptions +of Darius.<note place='foot'>See Rawlinson's Glossary, +s. v.</note> We hear of battles fought on the <emph>Sutledge</emph>, +and we hardly think that the battle field of the Sikhs +was nearly the same where Alexander fought the kings +of the Penjáb. But the name of the <emph>Sutledge</emph> is the +name of the same river as the <emph>Hesudrus</emph> of Alexander, +the <emph>Śatadru</emph> of the Indians, and among the oldest +hymns of the Veda, about 1500 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi>, we find a war-song +referring to a battle fought on the two banks of +the same river. +</p> + +<p> +No doubt there is danger in trusting to mere similarity +of names. Grimm may be right that the Arii of +Tacitus were originally Harii, and that their name is +not connected with Ârya. But the evidence on either +side being merely conjectural, this must remain an open +question. In most cases, however, a strict observation +of the phonetic laws peculiar to each language will remove +all uncertainty. Grimm, in his <q>History of the +German Language</q> (p. 228), imagined that <emph>Hariva</emph>, +the name of <emph>Herat</emph> in the cuneiform inscriptions, is connected +with Arii, the name which, as we saw, Herodotus +gives to the Medes. This cannot be, for the initial +aspiration in <emph>Hariva</emph> points to a word which in Sanskrit +begins with <emph>s</emph>, and not with a vowel, like <emph>ârya</emph>. The +following remarks will make this clearer. +</p> + +<p> +Herat is called <emph>Herat</emph> and <emph>Heri</emph>,<note place='foot'>W. +Ouseley, Orient. Geog. of Ebn. Haukal. Burnouf, Yasna, Notes, p. +102.</note> and the river on +<pb n='248'/><anchor id='Pg248'/> +which it stands is called <emph>Heri-rud</emph>. This river <emph>Heri</emph> +is called by Ptolemy Ἀρείας,<note place='foot'>Ptol. vi. +c. 17.</note> by other writers <emph>Arius</emph>; +and <emph>Aria</emph> is the name given to the country between +Parthia (Parthuwa) in the west, Margiana (Marghush) +in the north, Bactria (Bakhtrish) and Arachosia +(Harauwatish) in the east, and Drangiana (Zaraka) +in the south. This, however, though without the +initial <emph>h</emph>, is not Ariana, as described by Strabo, but an +independent country, forming part of it. It is supposed +to be the same as the <emph>Haraiva</emph> (Hariva) of the +cuneiform inscriptions, though this is doubtful. But it +is mentioned in the Zend-avesta, under the name of +<emph>Harôyu</emph>,<note place='foot'>It has been supposed +that <emph>harôyûm</emph> in the Zend-avesta stands for <emph>haraêvem</emph>, +and that the nominative was not <emph>Harôyu</emph>, but <emph>Haraêvô</emph>. +(Oppert, Journal +Asiatique, 1851, p. 280.) Without denying the possibility of the correctness +of this view, which is partially supported by the accusative <emph>vidôyum</emph>, +from <emph>vidaêvo</emph>, enemy of the Divs, there +is no reason why <emph>Harôyûm</emph> should +not be taken for a regular accusative of <emph>Harôyu</emph>. +This <emph>Harôyu</emph> would be as +natural and regular a form as <emph>Sarayu</emph> in Sanskrit, nay even more regular, +as <emph>harôyu</emph> would presuppose a Sanskrit +<emph>sarasyu</emph> or <emph>saroyu</emph>, from <emph>saras</emph>. M. +Oppert identifies the people of <emph>Haraiva</emph> with the Ἀρεῖοι, but not, like +Grimm, with the Ἄριοι.</note> as the sixth country created by Ormuzd. We +can trace this name with the initial <emph>h</emph> even beyond the +time of Zoroaster. The Zoroastrians were a colony +from northern India. They had been together for a +time with the people whose sacred songs have been +preserved to us in the Veda. A schism took place, +and the Zoroastrians migrated westward to Arachosia +and Persia. In their migrations they did what the +Greeks did when they founded new colonies, what +the Americans did in founding new cities. They +gave to the new cities and to the rivers along which +they settled, the names of cities and rivers familiar to +<pb n='249'/><anchor id='Pg249'/> +them, and reminding them of the localities which they +had left. Now, as a Persian <emph>h</emph> points to a Sanskrit <emph>s</emph>, +<emph>Harôyu</emph> would be in Sanskrit <emph>Saroyu</emph>. One of the sacred +rivers of India, a river mentioned in the Veda, and +famous in the epic poems as the river of Ayodhyâ, one +of the earliest capitals of India, the modern Oude, has +the name of <emph>Sarayu</emph>, the modern +<emph>Sardju</emph>.<note place='foot'>It is derived from a root +<emph>sar</emph> or <emph>sṛi</emph>, to go, to run, from which <emph>saras</emph>, water, +<emph>sarit</emph>, river, and <emph>Sarayu</emph>, the proper +name of the river near Oude; and we +may conclude with great probability that this Sarayu or Sarasyu gave the +name to the river Arius or Heri, and to the county of Ἄρια or Herat. Anyhow +Ἄρια, as the name of Herat, has no connection with Ἄρια the wide +country of the Âryas.</note> +</p> + +<p> +As Comparative Philology has thus traced the ancient +name of Ârya from India to Europe, as the original +title assumed by the Aryans before they left their common +home, it is but natural that it should have been +chosen as the technical term for the family of languages +which was formerly designated as Indo-Germanic, +Indo-European, Caucasian, or Japhetic. +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='250'/><anchor id='Pg250'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Lecture VII. The Constituent Elements Of Language.</head> + +<p> +Our analysis of some of the nominal and verbal +formations in the Aryan or Indo-European family of +speech has taught us that, however mysterious and +complicated these grammatical forms appear at first +sight, they are in reality the result of a very simple +process. It seems at first almost hopeless to ask such +questions as why the addition of a mere <emph>d</emph> should +change love present into love past, or why the termination +<emph>ai</emph> in French, if added to <emph>aimer</emph>, should convey +the idea of love to come. But, once placed under +the microscope of comparative grammar, these and all +other grammatical forms assume a very different and +much more intelligible aspect. We saw how what +we now call terminations were originally independent +words. After coalescing with the words which they +were intended to modify, they were gradually reduced +to mere syllables and letters, unmeaning in themselves, +yet manifesting their former power and independence +by the modification which they continue to produce in +the meaning of the words to which they are appended. +The true nature of grammatical terminations was first +pointed out by a philosopher, who, however wild some +of his speculations may be, had certainly caught many +a glimpse of the real life and growth of language, I +<pb n='251'/><anchor id='Pg251'/> +mean <emph>Horne Tooke</emph>. This is what he writes +of terminations:<note place='foot'>Diversions of Purley, p. 190.</note>— +</p> + +<p> +<q>For though I think I have good reasons to believe +that all terminations may likewise be traced to their +respective origin; and that, however artificial they +may now appear to us, they were not originally the +effect of premeditated and deliberate <emph>art</emph>, but separate +words by length of time corrupted and coalescing with +the words of which they are now considered as the +terminations. Yet this was less likely to be suspected +by others. And if it had been suspected, they would +have had much further to travel to their journey's end, +and through a road much more embarrassed; as the +corruption in those languages is of much longer standing +than in ours, and more complex.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Horne Tooke, however, though he saw rightly what +road should be followed to track the origin of grammatical +terminations, was himself without the means to +reach his journey's end. Most of his explanations +are quite untenable, and it is curious to observe in +reading his book, the Diversions of Purley, how a man +of a clear, sharp, and powerful mind, and reasoning +according to sound and correct principles, may yet, +owing to his defective knowledge of facts, arrive at +conclusions directly opposed to truth. +</p> + +<p> +When we have once seen how grammatical terminations +are to be traced back in the beginning to independent +words, we have learnt at the same time that +the component elements of language, which remain in +our crucible at the end of a complete grammatical +analysis, are of two kinds, namely, <emph>Roots predicative</emph> +and <emph>Roots demonstrative</emph>. +</p> + +<pb n='252'/><anchor id='Pg252'/> + +<p> +We call <emph>root</emph> or <emph>radical</emph>, whatever, in the words of +any language or family of languages, cannot be reduced +to a simpler or more original form. It may be well to +illustrate this by a few examples. But, instead of taking +a number of words in Sanskrit, Greek, and Latin, +and tracing them back to their common centre, it will +be more instructive if we begin with a root which has +been discovered, and follow it through its wanderings +from language to language. I take the root AR, to +which I alluded in our last Lecture as the source of +the word <emph>Arya</emph>, and we shall thus, while examining its +ramification, learn at the same time why that name +was chosen by the agricultural nomads, the ancestors +of the Aryan race. +</p> + +<p> +This root AR<note place='foot'>AR might be traced back +to the Sanskrit root, <emph>ṛi</emph>, to go (Pott, Etymologische +Forschungen, i. 218); but for our present purposes the root, AR, +is sufficient.</note> means <emph>to plough</emph>, to open the soil. +From it we have the Latin <emph>ar-are</emph>, the Greek <emph>ar-oun</emph>, +the Irish <emph>ar</emph>, the Lithuanian <emph>ar-ti</emph>, +the Russian <emph>ora-ti</emph>, +the Gothic <emph>ar-jan</emph>, the Anglo-Saxon <emph>er-jan</emph>, the modern +English <emph>to ear</emph>. Shakespeare says (Richard II. +<hi rend='smallcaps'>iii.</hi> 2), +<q>to ear the land that has some hope to grow.</q> +</p> + +<p> +From this we have the name of the plough, or the +instrument of earing: in Latin, <emph>ara-trum</emph>; in Greek, +<emph>aro-tron</emph>; in Bohemian, <emph>oradto</emph>; in Lithuanian, +<emph>arklas</emph>; in Cornish, <emph>aradar</emph>; in Welsh, +<emph>arad</emph>;<note place='foot'>If, as has been supposed, the Cornish and Welsh +words were corruptions of the Latin <emph>arâtrum</emph> they would have appeared as +<emph>areuder</emph>, <emph>arawd</emph>, +respectively.</note> in Old Norse, +<emph>ardhr</emph>. In Old Norse, however, <emph>ardhr</emph>, meaning originally +the plough, came to mean earnings or wealth; the +plough being, in early times, the most essential possession +of the peasant. In the same manner the Latin +<pb n='253'/><anchor id='Pg253'/> +name for money, <emph>pecunia</emph>, was derived from <emph>pecus</emph>, cattle; +the word <emph>fee</emph>, which is now restricted to the payment +made to a doctor or lawyer, was in Old English +<emph>feh</emph>, and in Anglo-Saxon <emph>feoh</emph>, meaning cattle and +wealth; for <emph>feoh</emph>, and Gothic <emph>faihu</emph>, are really the same +word as the Latin <emph>pecus</emph>, the modern German <emph>vieh</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +The act of ploughing is called <emph>aratio</emph> in Latin; <emph>arosis</emph> +in Greek: and I believe that <emph>arôma</emph>, in the sense of +perfume, had the same origin; for what is sweeter or +more aromatic than the smell of a ploughed field? In +Genesis, xxviii. 27, Jacob says <q>the smell of my son +is as the smell of a field which the Lord has blessed.</q> +</p> + +<p> +A more primitive formation of the root <emph>ar</emph> seems to +be the Greek <emph>era</emph>, earth, the Sanskrit <emph>irâ</emph>, the Old High-German +<emph>ëro</emph>, the Gaelic <emph>ire</emph>, <emph>irionn</emph>. It meant originally +the ploughed land, afterwards earth in general. Even +the word <emph>earth</emph>, the Gothic <emph>airtha</emph>,<note place='foot'>Grimm +remarks justly that <emph>airtha</emph> could not be derived from <emph>arjan</emph>, on +account of the difference in the vowels. But <emph>airtha</emph> is a much more ancient +formation, and comes from the root <emph>ar</emph>, which root, again, was originally +<emph>ṛi</emph> or <emph>ir</emph> (Benfey, Kurze Gr., p. 27). From this primitive root +<emph>ṛi</emph> or <emph>ir</emph>, we must derive both the Sanskrit <emph>irâ</emph> +or <emph>iḍâ</emph>, and the Gothic <emph>airtha</emph>. The latter +would correspond to the Sanskrit <emph>ṛita</emph>. The true meaning of the Sanskrit +<emph>iḍâ</emph> has never been discovered. The Brahmans explain it as prayer, +but this is not its original meaning.</note> the Anglo-Saxon +<emph>eorthe</emph>, must have been taken originally in the sense +of ploughed or cultivated land. The derivative <emph>ar-mentum</emph>, +formed like <emph>ju-mentum</emph>, would naturally have +been applied to any animal fit for ploughing and other +labor in the field, whether ox or horse. +</p> + +<p> +As agriculture was the principal labor in that early +state of society when we must suppose most of our +Aryan words to have been formed and applied to their +definite meanings, we may well understand how a word +which originally meant this special kind of labor, was +<pb n='254'/><anchor id='Pg254'/> +afterwards used to signify labor in general. The general +tendency in the growth of words and their meanings +is from the special to the more general: thus +<emph>gubernare</emph>, which originally meant to steer a ship, took +the general sense of governing. <emph>To equip</emph>, which +originally was to furnish a ship (French <emph>équiper</emph> and +<emph>esquif</emph>, from <emph>schifo</emph>, ship), came to mean furnishing in +general. Now in modern German, <emph>arbeit</emph> means simply +<emph>labor</emph>; <emph>arbeitsam</emph> means industrious. In Gothic, +too, <emph>arbaiþs</emph> is only used to express labor and trouble +in general. But in Old Norse, <emph>erfidhi</emph> means chiefly +<emph>ploughing</emph>, and afterwards labor in general; and the +same word in Anglo-Saxon, <emph>earfodh</emph> or <emph>earfedhe</emph>, is labor. +Of course we might equally suppose that, as laborer, +from meaning one who labors in general, came to take +the special sense of an agricultural laborer, so <emph>arbeit</emph>, +from meaning work in general, came to be applied, in +Old Norse, to the work of ploughing. But as the root +of <emph>erfidhi</emph> seems to be <emph>ar</emph>, our first explanation is the +more plausible. Besides, the simple <emph>ar</emph> in Old Norse +means ploughing and labor, and the Old High-German +<emph>art</emph> has likewise the sense of ploughing.<note place='foot'>Grimm derives +<emph>arbeit</emph>, Gothic <emph>arbaiths</emph>, Old High-German <emph>arapeit</emph>, +Modern High-German <emph>arbeit</emph>, directly from the Gothic <emph>arbja</emph>, +heir; but admits a relationship between <emph>arbja</emph> and the root +<emph>arjan</emph>, to plough. He identifies <emph>arbja</emph> with the Slavonic, +<emph>rab</emph>, servant, slave, and <emph>arbeit</emph> with <emph>rabota</emph>, +<emph>corvée</emph>, supposing that sons and heirs were the first natural slaves. He +supposes +even a relationship between <emph>rabota</emph> and the Latin <emph>labor</emph>. German +Dictionary, s. v. <hi rend='italic'>Arbeit</hi>.</note> +</p> + +<p> +Ἄρουρα and <emph>arvum</emph>, a field, would certainly have to +be referred to the root <emph>ar</emph>, to plough. And as ploughing +was not only one of the earliest kinds of labor, but +also one of the most primitive arts, I have no doubt +that the Latin <emph>ars</emph>, <emph>artis</emph>, and our own word <emph>art</emph>, +meant originally the art of all arts, first taught to mortals by +<pb n='255'/><anchor id='Pg255'/> +the goddess of all wisdom, the art of cultivating the +land. In Old High-German <emph>arunti</emph>, in Anglo-Saxon +<emph>ærend</emph>, mean simply work; but they too must originally +have meant the special work of agriculture; and in the +English <emph>errand</emph>, and <emph>errand-boy</emph>, the same word is still +in existence. +</p> + +<p> +But <emph>ar</emph> did not only mean to plough, or to cut open +the land; it was transferred at a very early time to the +ploughing of the sea, or rowing. Thus Shakspeare +says:— +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> +<lg> +<l><q rend='pre'>Make the sea serve them; which they <emph>ear</emph> and wound</q></l> +<l><q rend='post'>With keels.</q></l> +</lg> +</quote> + +<p> +In a similar manner, we find that Sanskrit derives +from <emph>ar</emph> the substantive <emph>aritra</emph>, not in the sense of a +plough, but in the sense of a rudder. In Anglo-Saxon +we find the simple form <emph>âr</emph>, the English <emph>oar</emph>, as it were +the plough-share of the water. The Greek also had +used the root <emph>ar</emph> in the sense of rowing; for +ἐρέτης<note place='foot'>Latin <emph>remus</emph> (O. Irish <emph>rám</emph>) for +<emph>resmus</emph>, connected with ἐρετμός. From +ἐρέτης, ἐρέσσω; and ὑπηρέτης, servant, helper. +<emph>Rostrum</emph> from <emph>rodere</emph>.</note> in +Greek is a rower, and their word τρι-ήρ-ης, meant originally +a ship with three oars, or with three rows of +oars,<note place='foot'>Cf. Eur. Hec. 455, κώπη ἁλιήρης. Ἀμφήρης +means having oars on both sides.</note> a trireme. +</p> + +<p> +This comparison of ploughing and rowing is of frequent +occurrence in ancient languages. The English +word <emph>plough</emph>, the Slavonic <emph>ploug</emph>, has been identified +with the Sanskrit <emph>plava</emph>,<note place='foot'>From Sanskrit <emph>plu</emph>, +πλέω; cf. fleet and float.</note> a ship, and with the Greek +<emph>ploion</emph>, ship. As the Aryans spoke of a ship ploughing +the sea, they also spoke of a plough sailing across +the field; and thus it was that the same names were +<pb n='256'/><anchor id='Pg256'/> +applied to both.<note place='foot'>Other similes: ὕνις, and ὕννις, ploughshare, derived +by Plutarch from ὗς, boar. A plough is said to be called a pigsnose. The Latin +<emph>porca</emph>, a ploughed field, is derived from <emph>porcus</emph>, hog; and the +German <emph>furicha</emph>, furrow, is connected with <emph>farah</emph>, boar. +The Sanskrit <emph>vṛika</emph>, wolf, from <emph>vraśch</emph>, to tear, is used for +plough, Rv. i. 117, 21. <emph>Godaraņa</emph>, earth-tearer, is another +word for plough in Sanskrit. Gothic <emph>hoha</emph>, plough = Sk. <emph>koka</emph>, +wolf. See Grimm, Deutsche Sprache, and Kuhn, Indische Studien, vol. i. p. 321.</note> +In English dialects, <emph>plough</emph> or <emph>plow</emph> +is still used in the general sense of waggon or conveyance.<note place='foot'>In the +Vale of Blackmore, a waggon is called <emph>plough</emph>, or <emph>plow</emph>, and +<emph>zull</emph> +(A.-S. syl) is used for <emph>aratrum</emph> (Barnes, Dorset Dialect, p. 369).</note> +</p> + +<p> +We might follow the offshoots of this root <emph>ar</emph> still +further, but the number of words which we have examined +in various languages will suffice to show +what is meant by a predicative root. In all these +words <emph>ar</emph> is the radical element, all the rest is merely +formative. The root <emph>ar</emph> is called a predicative root, +because in whatever composition it enters, it predicates +one and the same conception, whether of the plough, +or the rudder, or the ox, or the field. Even in such +a word as <emph>artistic</emph>, the predicative power of the root <emph>ar</emph> +may still be perceived, though, of course, as it were by +means of a powerful telescope only. The Brahmans +who called themselves <emph>ârya</emph> in India, were no more +aware of the real origin of this name and its connection +with agricultural labor, than the artist who now +speaks of <emph>his art</emph> as a divine inspiration suspects that +the word which he uses was originally applicable only +to so primitive an art as that of ploughing. +</p> + +<p> +We shall now examine another family of words, in +order to see by what process the radical elements of +words were first discovered. +</p> + +<p> +Let us take the word <emph>respectable</emph>. It is a word of +Latin not of Saxon, origin, as we see by the termination +<pb n='257'/><anchor id='Pg257'/> +<emph>able</emph>. In <emph>respectabilis</emph> we easily distinguish the verb +<emph>respectare</emph> and the termination <emph>bilis</emph>. We then separate +the prefix <emph>re</emph>, which leaves <emph>spectare</emph>, and we trace +<emph>spectare</emph> as a participial formation back to the Latin verb +<emph>spicere</emph> or <emph>specere</emph>, meaning to see, to look. In +<emph>specere</emph>, again, we distinguish between the changeable termination +<emph>ere</emph> and the unchangeable remnant <emph>spec</emph>, which we +call the root. This root we expect to find in Sanskrit +and the other Aryan languages; and so we do. In +Sanskrit the more usual form is <emph>paś</emph>, to see, without the +<emph>s</emph>; but <emph>spaś</emph> also is found in <emph>spaśa</emph>, a spy, in +<emph>spashṭa</emph> (in <emph>vi-spashṭa</emph>), clear, manifest, and in the Vedic +<emph>spaś</emph>, a guardian. In the Teutonic family we find <emph>spëhôn</emph> in +Old High-German meaning to look, to spy, to contemplate; +and <emph>spëha</emph>, the English spy.<note place='foot'>Pott, +Etymologische Forschungen, p. 267; Benfey, Griechisches Wurzelwörterbuch, +p. 236.</note> In Greek, the root <emph>spek</emph> has +been changed into <emph>skep</emph>, which exists in <emph>skeptomai</emph>, +I look, I examine; from whence <emph>skeptikos</emph>, an +examiner or inquirer, in theological language, a sceptic; +and <emph>episkopos</emph>, an overseer, a bishop. Let us now examine +the various ramifications of this root. Beginning +with <emph>respectable</emph>, we found that it originally meant a +person who deserves <emph>respect</emph>, <emph>respect</emph> meaning <emph>looking +back</emph>. We pass by common objects or persons without +noticing them, whereas we turn back to look again at +those which deserve our admiration, our regard, our +respect. This was the original meaning of <emph>respect</emph> and +<emph>respectable</emph>, nor need we be surprised at this if we consider +that <emph>noble</emph>, <emph>nobilis</emph> in Latin, conveyed originally +no more than the idea of a person that deserves to be +known; for <emph>nobilis</emph> stands for <emph>gnobilis</emph>, just as +<emph>nomen</emph> +stands for <emph>gnomen</emph>, or <emph>natus</emph> for <emph>gnatus</emph>. +</p> + +<pb n='258'/><anchor id='Pg258'/> + +<p> +<q>With respect to</q> has now become almost a mere +preposition. For if we say, <q>With respect to this +point I have no more to say,</q> this is the same as <q>I +have no more to say on this point.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Again, as in looking back we single out a person, +the adjective <emph>respective</emph>, and the adverb <emph>respectively</emph>, +are used almost in the same sense as special, or singly. +</p> + +<p> +The English <emph>respite</emph> is the Norman modification of +<emph>respectus</emph>, the French <emph>répit</emph>. <emph>Répit</emph> meant originally +looking back, reviewing the whole evidence. A criminal +received so many days <emph>ad respectum</emph>, to re-examine +the case. Afterwards it was said that the prisoner had +received a respit, that is to say, had obtained a re-examination; +and at last a verb was formed, and it was +said that a person had been respited. +</p> + +<p> +As <emph>specere</emph>, to see, with the preposition <emph>re</emph>, came to +mean respect, so with the preposition <emph>de</emph>, down, it forms +the Latin <emph>despicere</emph>, meaning to look down, the English +<emph>despise</emph>. The French <emph>dépit</emph> (Old French <emph>despit</emph>) means +no longer contempt, though it is the Latin <emph>despectus</emph>, +but rather <emph>anger</emph>, <emph>vexation</emph>. <emph>Se dépiter</emph> is to be +vexed, to fret. <q><emph>En dépit de lui</emph></q> is originally <q>angry with +him,</q> then <q>in spite of him;</q> and the English <emph>spite</emph>, +<emph>in spite of</emph>, <emph>spiteful</emph>, are mere abbreviations +of <emph>despite</emph>, <emph>in +despite of</emph>, <emph>despiteful</emph>, and have nothing whatever to do +with the spitting of cats. +</p> + +<p> +As <emph>de</emph> means down from above, so <emph>sub</emph> means up from +below, and this added to <emph>specere</emph>, to look, gives us <emph>suspicere</emph>, +<emph>suspicari</emph>, to look up, in the sense of to +suspect.<note place='foot'>The Greek υποδρα, askance, is derived from ὑπὸ, and δρα, +which is connected with δέρκομαι, I see; the Sanskrit, dṛiś.</note> +From it <emph>suspicion</emph>, <emph>suspicious</emph>; and likewise the French +<pb n='259'/><anchor id='Pg259'/> +<emph>soupçon</emph>, even in such phrases as <q>there is a soupçon +of chicory in this coffee,</q> meaning just a touch, just +the smallest atom of chicory. +</p> + +<p> +As <emph>circum</emph> means round about, so <emph>circumspect</emph> means, +of course, cautious, careful. +</p> + +<p> +With <emph>in</emph>, meaning into, <emph>specere</emph> forms <emph>inspicere</emph>, to +inspect; hence <emph>inspector</emph>, <emph>inspection</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +With <emph>ad</emph>, towards, <emph>specere</emph> becomes <emph>adspicere</emph>, to +look at a thing. Hence <emph>adspectus</emph>, the aspect, the look or +appearance of things. +</p> + +<p> +So with <emph>pro</emph>, forward, <emph>specere</emph> became <emph>prospicere</emph>; +and gave rise to such words as <emph>prospectus</emph>, as it were a +look out, <emph>prospective</emph>, &c. With <emph>con</emph>, with, +<emph>spicere</emph> forms <emph>conspicere</emph>, to see together, +<emph>conspectus</emph>, <emph>conspicuous</emph>. We +saw before in <emph>respectable</emph>, that a new word <emph>spectare</emph> is +formed from the participle of <emph>spicere</emph>. This, with the +preposition <emph>ex</emph>, out, gives us the Latin <emph>expectare</emph>, the +English <emph>to expect</emph>, to look out; with its derivatives. +</p> + +<p> +<emph>Auspicious</emph> is another word which contains our root +as the second of its component elements. The Latin +<emph>auspicium</emph> stands for <emph>avispicium</emph>, and meant the looking +out for certain birds which were considered to be +of good or bad omen to the success of any public or +private act. Hence <emph>auspicious</emph>, in the sense of lucky. +<emph>Haru-spex</emph> was the name given to a person who foretold +the future from the inspection of the entrails of +animals. +</p> + +<p> +Again, from <emph>specere</emph>, <emph>speculum</emph> was formed, in the +sense of looking-glass, or any other means of looking +at oneself; and from it <emph>speculari</emph>, the English <emph>to speculate</emph>, +<emph>speculative</emph>, &c. +</p> + +<p> +But there are many more offshoots of this one root. +Thus, the Latin <emph>speculum</emph>, looking-glass, became <emph>specchio</emph> +<pb n='260'/><anchor id='Pg260'/> +in Italian; and the same word, though in a roundabout +way, came into French as the adjective <emph>espiègle</emph>, +waggish. The origin of this French word is curious. +There exists in German a famous cycle of stories, +mostly tricks, played by a half-historical, half-mythical +character of the name of <emph>Eulenspiegel</emph>, or <emph>Owl-glass</emph>. +These stories were translated into French, and the hero +was known at first by the name of <emph>Ulespiègle</emph>, which +name, contracted afterwards into <emph>Espiègle</emph>, became a +general name for every wag. +</p> + +<p> +As the French borrowed not only from Latin, but +likewise from the Teutonic languages, we meet there +side by side with the derivatives of the Latin <emph>specere</emph>, +the old High-German, <emph>spëhôn</emph>, slightly disguised as <emph>épier</emph>, +to spy, the Italian <emph>spiare</emph>. The German word for a +spy was <emph>spëha</emph>, and this appears in old French as <emph>espie</emph>, +in modern French as <emph>espion</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +One of the most prolific branches of the same root +is the Latin <emph>species</emph>. Whether we take <emph>species</emph> in the +sense of a perennial succession of similar individuals +in continual generations (<emph>Jussieu</emph>), or look upon it +as existing only as a category of thought (<emph>Agassiz</emph>), +<emph>species</emph> was intended originally as the literal translation +of the Greek <emph>eidos</emph> as opposed to <emph>genos</emph>, or <emph>genus</emph>. +The Greeks classified things originally according to +<emph>kind</emph> and <emph>form</emph>, and though these terms were afterwards +technically defined by Aristotle, their etymological +meaning is in reality the most appropriate. +Things may be classified either because they are of +the same <emph>genus</emph> or <emph>kind</emph>, that is to say, because they +had the same origin; this gives us a genealogical classification: +or they can be classified because they have +the same appearance, <emph>eidos</emph>, or <emph>form</emph>, without claiming +for them a common origin; and this gives us a morphological +<pb n='261'/><anchor id='Pg261'/> +classification. It was, however, in the Aristotelian, +and not in its etymological sense, that the +Greek <emph>eidos</emph> was rendered in Latin by <emph>species</emph>, meaning +the subdivision of a genus, the class of a family. +Hence the French <emph>espèce</emph>, a kind; the English <emph>special</emph>, +in the sense of particular as opposed to general. There +is little of the root <emph>spaś</emph>, to see, left in a <emph>special train</emph>, +or a <emph>special messenger</emph>; yet the connection, though not +apparent, can be restored with perfect certainty. We +frequently hear the expression <emph>to specify</emph>. A man +specifies his grievances. What does it mean? The +mediæval Latin <emph>specificus</emph> is a literal translation of the +Greek <emph>eidopoios</emph>. This means what makes or constitutes +an <emph>eidos</emph> or species. Now, in classification, what +constitutes a species is that particular quality which, +superadded to other qualities, shared in common by +all the members of a genus, distinguishes one class +from all other classes. Thus the specific character +which distinguishes man from all other animals, is +reason or language. Specific, therefore, assumed the sense of +<emph>distinguishing</emph> or <emph>distinct</emph>, and the verb <emph>to specify</emph> +conveyed the meaning of enumerating distinctly, +or one by one. I finish with the French <emph>épicier</emph>, a +respectable grocer, but originally a man who sold +drugs. The different kinds of drugs which the apothecary +had to sell, were spoken of, with a certain learned +air, as <emph>species</emph>, not as drugs in general, but as peculiar +drugs and special medicines. Hence the chymist or +apothecary is still called <emph>Speziale</emph> in Italian, his shop +<emph>spezieria</emph>.<note place='foot'>Generi coloniali, +colonial goods. Marsh, p. 253. In Spanish, generos, +merchandise.</note> In French <emph>species</emph>, which regularly became +<emph>espèce</emph>, assumed a new form to express drugs, namely +<emph>épices</emph>; the English <emph>spices</emph>, the German <emph>spezereien</emph>. +<pb n='262'/><anchor id='Pg262'/> +Hence the famous <emph>pain d'épices</emph>, gingerbread nuts, and +<emph>épicier</emph>, a grocer. If you try for a moment to trace +<emph>spicy</emph>, or <emph>a well-spiced</emph> article, back to the simple root +<emph>specere</emph>, to look, you will understand that marvellous +power of language which out of a few simple elements +has created a variety of names hardly surpassed by the +unbounded variety of nature herself.<note place='foot'>Many derivatives might have +been added, such as <emph>specimen</emph>, <emph>spectator</emph>, +<emph>le spectacle</emph>, <emph>specialité</emph>, <emph>spectrum</emph>, +<emph>spectacles</emph>, <emph>specious</emph>, <emph>specula</emph>, &c.</note> +</p> + +<p> +I say <q>out of a few simple elements,</q> for the number +of what we call full predicative roots, such as <emph>ar</emph>, +to plough, or <emph>spaś</emph>, to look, is indeed small. +</p> + +<p> +A root is necessarily monosyllabic. Roots consisting +of more than one syllable can always be proved to +be derivative roots, and even among monosyllabic +roots it is necessary to distinguish between primitive, +secondary, and tertiary roots. +</p> + +<p> +A. Primitive roots are those which consist— +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> +<p> +(1) of one vowel; for instance, <emph>i</emph>, to go; +</p> + +<p> +(2) of one vowel and one consonant; for instance, +<emph>ad</emph>, to eat; +</p> + +<p> +(3) of one consonant and one vowel; for instance, +<emph>dâ</emph>, to give. +</p> +</quote> + +<p> +B. Secondary roots are those which consist— +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> +<p> +(1) of one consonant, vowel, and consonant; for +instance, <emph>tud</emph>, to strike. +</p> +</quote> + +<p> +In these roots either the first or the last consonant +is modificatory. +</p> + +<p> +C. Tertiary roots are those which consist— +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> +<p> +(1) of consonant, consonant, and vowel; for instance, +<emph>plu</emph>, to flow; +</p> + +<p> +(2) of vowel, consonant, and consonant; for instance, +<emph>ard</emph>, to hurt; +</p> + +<pb n='263'/><anchor id='Pg263'/> + +<p> +(3) of consonant, consonant, vowel, and consonant; +for instance, <emph>spaś</emph>, to see; +</p> + +<p> +(4) of consonant, consonant, vowel, consonant, +and consonant; for instance, <emph>spand</emph>, to +tremble. +</p> +</quote> + +<p> +The primary roots are the most important in the +early history of language; but their predicative power +being generally of too indefinite a character to answer +the purposes of advancing thought, they were soon encroached +upon and almost supplanted by secondary and +tertiary radicals. +</p> + +<p> +In the secondary roots we can frequently observe +that one of the consonants, in the Aryan languages, +generally the final, is liable to modification. The root +retains its general meaning, which is slightly modified +and determined by the changes of the final consonants. +Thus, besides <emph>tud</emph> (<emph>tudati</emph>), we have in Sanskrit +<emph>tup</emph> (<emph>topati</emph>, <emph>tupati</emph>, and <emph>tumpati</emph>), +meaning to strike; Greek, <emph>typ-tō</emph>. We meet likewise with <emph>tubh</emph> +(<emph>tubhnâti</emph>, <emph>tubhyati</emph>, +<emph>tobhate</emph>), to strike; and, according to Sanskrit grammarians, with +<emph>tuph</emph> (<emph>tophati</emph>, <emph>tuphati</emph>, <emph>tumphati</emph>). +Then there is a root <emph>tuj</emph> (<emph>tunjati</emph>, <emph>tojati</emph>), to +strike, to excite; +another root, <emph>tur</emph> (<emph>tutorti</emph>), to which the same meaning +is ascribed; another, <emph>tûr</emph> (<emph>tûryate</emph>), to hurt. Then +there is the further derivative <emph>turv</emph> (<emph>tûrvati</emph>), to strike, +to conquer; there is <emph>tuh</emph> (<emph>tohati</emph>), to pain, to vex; and +there is <emph>tuś</emph> (<emph>tośate</emph>), to which Sanskrit grammarians +attribute the sense of striking. +</p> + +<p> +Although we may call all these verbal bases roots, +they stand to the first class in about the same relation +as the triliteral Semitic roots to the more primitive +biliteral.<note place='foot'>Benloew, Aperçu Général, p. 28 +<hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi></note> +</p> + +<pb n='264'/><anchor id='Pg264'/> + +<p> +In the third class we shall find that one of the two +consonants is always a semivowel, nasal, or sibilant, +these being more variable than the other consonants; +and we can almost always point to one consonant as +of later origin, and added to a biconsonantal root in +order to render its meaning more special. Thus we +have, besides <emph>spaś</emph>, the root <emph>paś</emph>, and even this root +has been traced back by Pott to a more primitive <emph>aś</emph>. +Thus <emph>vand</emph>, again, is a mere strengthening of the root +<emph>vad</emph>, like <emph>mand</emph> of <emph>mad</emph>, like +<emph>yu-na-j</emph> and <emph>yu-n-j</emph> of <emph>yuj</emph>. +The root <emph>yuj</emph>, to join, and <emph>yudh</emph>, to fight, both point +back to a root <emph>yu</emph>, to mingle, and this simple root has +been preserved in Sanskrit. We may well understand +that a root, having the general meaning of mingling or +being together, should be employed to express both the +friendly joining of hands and the engaging in hostile +combat; but we may equally understand that language, +in its progress to clearness and definiteness, +should have desired a distinction between these two +meanings, and should gladly have availed herself of +the two derivatives, <emph>yuj</emph> and <emph>yudh</emph>, to mark this distinction. +</p> + +<p> +Sanskrit grammarians have reduced the whole +growth of their language to 1706 roots,<note place='foot'><p>Benfey, +Grammatik, § 147:— +</p> +<p> +Roots of the 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9 classes: 226<lb/> +Roots of the 1, 4, 6, 10 classes: 1480<lb/> +Total: 1706, including 143 of the 10th class. +</p></note> that is to +say, they have admitted so many radicals in order to +derive from them, according to their system of grammatical +derivation, all nouns, verbs, adjectives, pronouns, +prepositions, adverbs, and conjunctions, which +<pb n='265'/><anchor id='Pg265'/> +occur in Sanskrit. According to our explanation of +a root, however, this number of 1706 would have +to be reduced considerably, and though a few new +roots would likewise have to be added which Sanskrit +grammarians failed to discover, yet the number +of primitive sounds, expressive of definite meanings, +requisite for the etymological analysis of the whole +Sanskrit dictionary would not amount to even one +third of that number. Hebrew has been reduced to +about 500 roots,<note place='foot'>Renan, Histoire des Langues sémitiques, p. 138. +Benloew estimates the necessary radicals of Gothic at 600, of modern German at 250, p. 22. +Pott thinks that each language has about 1000 roots.</note> and I doubt whether we want a +larger number for Sanskrit. This shows a wise +spirit of economy on the part of primitive language, +for the possibility of forming new roots for every +new impression was almost unlimited. Even if we +put the number of letters only at twenty-four, the +possible number of biliteral and triliteral roots would +amount together to 14,400; whereas Chinese, though +abstaining from composition and derivation, and therefore +requiring a larger number of radicals than any +other language, was satisfied with about 450. With +these 450 sounds raised to 1263 by various accents and +intonations, the Chinese have produced a dictionary of +from 40,000 to 50,000 words.<note place='foot'>The +exact number in the Imperial Dictionary of Khang-hi amounts to +42,718. About one-fourth part has become obsolete; and one-half of the +rest may be considered of rare occurrence, thus leaving only about 15,000 +words in actual use. <q>The exact number of the classical characters is +42,718. Many of them are no longer in use in the modern language, but +they occur in the canonical and in the classical books. They may be found +sometimes in official documents, when an attempt is made at imitating the +old style. A considerable portion of these are names of persons, places, +mountains, rivers, &c. In order to compete for the place of imperial historian, +it was necessary to know 9,000, which were collected in a separate +manual.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Stanislas Julien.</hi></note> +</p> + +<pb n='266'/><anchor id='Pg266'/> + +<p> +It is clear, however, that in addition to these predicative +roots, we want another class of radical elements +to enable us to account for the full growth of language. +With the 400 or 500 predicative roots at her disposal, +language would not have been at a loss to coin names +for all things that come under our cognizance. Language +is a thrifty housewife. Consider the variety +of ideas that were expressed by the one root <emph>spaś</emph>, and +you will see that with 500 such roots she might form a +dictionary sufficient to satisfy the wants, however extravagant, +of her husband—the human mind. If +each root yielded fifty derivatives, we should have +25,000 words. Now, we are told, on good authority, +by a country clergyman, that some of the laborers in +his parish had not 300 words in their vocabulary.<note place='foot'>The study +of the English language by A. D'Orsey, p. 15.</note> +The vocabulary of the ancient sages of Egypt, at least +as far as it is known to us from the hieroglyphic inscriptions, +amounts to about 685 words.<note place='foot'>This is the +number of words in the Vocabulary given by Bunsen, in +the first volume of his Egypt, pp. 453-491. Several of these words, however, +though identical in sound, must be separated etymologically, and later +researches have still further increased the number. The number of hieroglyphic +groups in Sharpe's <q>Egyptian Hieroglyphics,</q> 1861, amounts to +2030.</note> The <emph>libretto</emph> +of an Italian opera seldom displays a greater variety of +words.<note place='foot'>Marsh, Lectures, p. 182. M. Thommerel stated the number of words +in the Dictionaries of Robertson and Webster as 43,566. Todd's edition +of Johnson, however, is said to contain 58,000 words, and the later editions +of Webster have reached the number of 70,000, counting the participles of +the present and perfect as independent vocables. Flügel estimated the +number of words in his own dictionary at 94,464, of which 65,085 are simple, +29,379 compound. This was in 1843; and he then expressed a hope +that in his next edition the number of words would far exceed 100,000. +This is the number fixed upon by Mr. Marsh as the minimum of the <emph>copia +vocabulorum</emph> in English. See <hi rend='italic'>Saturday Review</hi>, +Nov. 2, 1861.</note> A well-educated person in England, who has +<pb n='267'/><anchor id='Pg267'/> +been at a public school and at the university, who reads +his Bible, his Shakespeare, the <q>Times,</q> and all the +books of Mudie's Library, seldom uses more than about +3000 or 4000 words in actual conversation. Accurate +thinkers and close reasoners, who avoid vague and general +expressions, and wait till they find the word that +exactly fits their meaning, employ a larger stock; and +eloquent speakers may rise to a command of 10,000. +Shakespeare, who displayed a greater variety of expression +than probably any writer in any language, produced +all his plays with about 15,000 words. Milton's +works are built up with 8000; and the Old Testament +says all that it has to say with 5,642 +words.<note place='foot'>Renan, Histoire, p. 138.</note> +</p> + +<p> +Five hundred roots, therefore, considering their fertility +and pliancy, was more than was wanted for the +dictionary of our primitive ancestors. And yet they +wanted something more. If they had a root expressive +of light and splendor, that root might have formed +the predicate in the names of sun, and moon, and stars, +and heaven, day, morning, dawn, spring, gladness, joy, +beauty, majesty, love, friend, gold, riches, &c. But if +they wanted to express <emph>here</emph> and <emph>there</emph>, <emph>who</emph>, +<emph>what</emph>, <emph>this</emph>, <emph>that</emph>, <emph>thou</emph>, +<emph>he</emph>, they would have found it impossible to +find any predicative root that could be applied to this +purpose. Attempts have indeed been made to trace +these words back to predicative roots; but if we are +told that the demonstrative root <emph>ta</emph>, this or there, may +be derived from a predicative root <emph>tan</emph>, to extend, we +find that even in our modern languages, the demonstrative +pronouns and particles are of too primitive and +independent a nature to allow of so artificial an interpretation. +The sound <emph>ta</emph> or <emph>sa</emph>, for this or there, is as involuntary, +as natural, as independent an expression as any +<pb n='268'/><anchor id='Pg268'/> +of the predicative roots, and although some of these demonstrative, +or pronominal, or local roots, for all these +names have been applied to them, may be traced back +to a predicative source, we must admit a small class of +independent radicals, not predicative in the usual sense +of the word, but simply pointing, simply expressive of +existence under certain more or less definite, local or +temporal prescriptions. +</p> + +<p> +It will be best to give one illustration at least of a +pronominal root and its influence in the formation of +words. +</p> + +<p> +In some languages, and particularly in Chinese, a +predicative root may by itself be used as a noun, or +a verb, or an adjective or adverb. Thus the Chinese +sound <emph>ta</emph> means, without any change of form, great, +greatness, and to be great.<note place='foot'>Endlicher, Chinesische +Grammatik, § 128.</note> If <emph>ta</emph> stands before a +substantive, it has the meaning of an adjective. Thus +<emph>ta jin</emph> means a great man. If <emph>ta</emph> stands after a substantive, +it is a predicate, or, as we should say, a +verb. Thus <emph>jin ta</emph> (or jin ta ye) would mean the +man is great.<note place='foot'><p>If two words are placed +like <emph>jin ta</emph>, the first may form the predicate of +the second, the second being used as a substantive. Thus <emph>jin ta</emph> might mean +the greatness of man, but in this case it is more usual to say <emph>jin tci ta</emph>. +</p> +<p> +<q>Another instance, <emph>chen</emph>, virtue; Ex. jin tchi chen, +the virtue of man; <emph>chen</emph>, virtuous; Ex. chen jin, the +virtuous man; <emph>chen</emph>, to approve; Ex. chen tchi, +to find it good; <emph>chen</emph>, well; Ex. chen ko, to sing +well.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Stanislas Julien.</hi></p></note> Or again, +</p> + +<lg> +<l>ģin ngŏ, li pŭ ngŏ,</l> +<l>would mean, man bad, law not bad.</l> +</lg> + +<p> +Here we see that there is no outward distinction whatever +between a root and a word, and that a noun is +distinguished from a verb merely by its collocation in +a sentence. +</p> + +<p> +In other languages, however, and particularly in the +<pb n='269'/><anchor id='Pg269'/> +Aryan languages, no predicative root can by itself form +a word. Thus in Latin there is a root <emph>luc</emph>, to shine. In +order to have a substantive, such as light, it was necessary +to add a pronominal or demonstrative root, this +forming the general subject of which the meaning contained +in the root is to be predicated. Thus by the +addition of the pronominal element <emph>s</emph> we have the +Latin noun, <emph>luc-s</emph>, the light, or literally, shining-there. +Let us add a personal pronoun, and we have the verb +<emph>luc-e-s</emph>, shining-thou, thou shinest. Let us add other +pronominal derivatives, and we get the adjectives, <emph>lucidus</emph>, +<emph>luculentus</emph>, &c. +</p> + +<p> +It would be a totally mistaken view, however, were +we to suppose that all derivative elements, all that remains +of a word after the predicative root has been removed, +must be traced back to pronominal roots. We +have only to look at some of our own modern derivatives +in order to be convinced that many of them were +originally predicative, that they entered into composition +with the principal predicative root, and then dwindled +down to mere suffixes. Thus <emph>scape</emph> in <emph>landscape</emph>, +and the more modern <emph>ship</emph> in <emph>hardship</emph> are both derived +from the same root which we have in Gothic,<note place='foot'>Grimm, Deutsche +Grammatik, b. ii. s. 521.</note> <emph>skapa</emph>, +<emph>skôp</emph>, <emph>skôpum</emph>, to create; in Anglo-Saxon, <emph>scape</emph>, +<emph>scôp</emph>, <emph>scôpon</emph>. It is the same as the German derivative, +<emph>schaft</emph>, in <emph>Gesellschaft</emph>, &c. So again +<emph>dom</emph> in <emph>wisdom</emph> or <emph>christendom</emph> +is derived from the same root which we have in +<emph>to do</emph>. It is the same as the German <emph>thum</emph> +in <emph>Christenthum</emph>, +the Anglo-Saxon <emph>dôm</emph> in <emph>cyning-dom</emph>, <emph>Königthum</emph>. +Sometimes it may seem doubtful whether a derivative +element was originally merely demonstrative or predicative. +Thus the termination of the comparative in +<pb n='270'/><anchor id='Pg270'/> +Sanskrit is <emph>tara</emph>, the Greek <emph>teros</emph>. This might, at first +sight, be taken for a demonstrative element, but it is in +reality the root <emph>tar</emph>, which means <emph>to go beyond</emph>, which +we have likewise in the Latin <emph>trans</emph>. This <emph>trans</emph> in its +French form <emph>très</emph> is prefixed to adjectives in order to +express a higher or transcendent degree, and the same +root was well adapted to form the comparative in the +ancient Aryan tongues. This root must likewise be +admitted in one of the terminations of the locative +which is <emph>tra</emph> in Sanskrit; for instance from <emph>ta</emph>, a demonstrative +root, we form <emph>ta-tra</emph>, there, originally this +way; we form <emph>anyatra</emph>, in another way; the same as +in Latin we say <emph>ali-ter</emph>, from <emph>aliud</emph>; compounds no +more surprising than the French <emph>autrement</emph> (see p. 55) +and the English <emph>otherwise</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +Most of the terminations of declension and conjugation +are demonstrative roots, and the <emph>s</emph>, for instance, of +the third person singular, he loves, can be proved to +have been originally the demonstrative pronoun of the +third person. It was originally not <emph>s</emph> but <emph>t</emph>. This will +require some explanation. The termination of the third +person singular of the present is <emph>ti</emph> in Sanskrit. Thus +<emph>dâ</emph>, to give, becomes <emph>dadâti</emph>, he gives; <emph>dhâ</emph>, to +place, <emph>dadhâti</emph>, he places. +</p> + +<p> +In Greek this <emph>ti</emph> is changed into <emph>si</emph>; just as the Sanskrit +<emph>tvam</emph>, the Latin <emph>tu</emph>, thou, appears in Greek as <emph>sy</emph>. +Thus Greek <emph>didōsi</emph> corresponds to Sanskrit <emph>dadâti</emph>; +<emph>tithēsi</emph> to <emph>dadhâti</emph>. In the course of time, however, +every Greek <emph>s</emph> between two vowels, in a termination, +was elided. Thus <emph>genos</emph> does not form the genitive +<emph>genesos</emph>, like the Latin <emph>genus</emph>, <emph>genesis</emph> or +<emph>generis</emph>, but <emph>geneos</emph> = <emph>genous</emph>. The dative is not +<emph>genesi</emph> (the Latin <emph>generi</emph>), but <emph>geneï</emph> = +<emph>genei</emph>. In the same manner all the +<pb n='271'/><anchor id='Pg271'/> +regular verbs have <emph>ei</emph> for the termination of the third +person singular. But this <emph>ei</emph> stands for <emph>esi</emph>. Thus +<emph>typtei</emph> stands for <emph>typtesi</emph>, and this for <emph>typteti</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +The Latin drops the final <emph>i</emph>, and instead of <emph>ti</emph> has +<emph>t</emph>. +Thus we get <emph>amat</emph>, <emph>dicit</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +Now there is a law to which I alluded before, which +is called Grimm's Law. According to it every tenuis +in Latin is in Gothic represented by its corresponding +aspirate. Hence, instead of <emph>t</emph>, we should expect in +Gothic <emph>th</emph>; and so we find indeed in Gothic <emph>habaiþ</emph>, +instead of Latin <emph>habet</emph>. This aspirate likewise appears +in Anglo-Saxon, where <emph>he loves</emph> is <emph>lufað</emph>. It is preserved +in the Biblical <emph>he loveth</emph>, and it is only in modern English +that it gradually sank to <emph>s</emph>. In the <emph>s</emph> of <emph>he loves</emph>, +therefore, we have a demonstrative root, added to the +predicative root <emph>love</emph>, and this <emph>s</emph> is originally the same +as the Sanskrit <emph>ti</emph>. This <emph>ti</emph> again must be traced back +to the demonstrative root <emph>ta</emph>, this or there; which exists +in the Sanskrit demonstrative pronoun <emph>tad</emph>, the Greek +<emph>to</emph>, the Gothic <emph>thata</emph>, the English <emph>that</emph>; and which +in Latin we can trace in <emph>talis</emph>, <emph>tantus</emph>, +<emph>tunc</emph>, <emph>tam</emph>, and even +in <emph>tamen</emph>, an old locative in <emph>men</emph>. We have thus seen +that what we call the third person singular of the +present is in reality a simple compound of a predicative +root with a demonstrative root. It is a compound like +any other, only that the second part is not predicative, +but simply demonstrative. As in pay-master we predicate +pay of master, meaning a person whose office it is +to pay, so in <emph>dadâ-ti</emph>, <emph>give-he</emph>, the ancient framers of language +simply predicated giving of some third person, +and this synthetic proposition, <emph>give-he</emph>, is the same as +what we now call the third person singular in the +<pb n='272'/><anchor id='Pg272'/> +indicative mood, of the present tense, in the active +voice.<note place='foot'>Each verb in Greek, if conjugated through all its voices, +tenses, moods, and persons, yields, together with its participles, about 1300 +forms.</note> +</p> + +<p> +We have necessarily confined ourselves in our analysis +of language to that family of languages to which +our own tongue, and those with which we are best acquainted, +belong; but what applies to Sanskrit and the +Aryan family applies to the whole realm of human +speech. Every language, without a single exception, +that has as yet been cast into the crucible of comparative +grammar, has been found to contain these two substantial +elements, predicative and demonstrative roots. +In the Semitic family these two constituent elements +are even more palpable than in Sanskrit and Greek. +Even before the discovery of Sanskrit, and the rise of +comparative philology, Semitic scholars had successfully +traced back the whole dictionary of Hebrew and Arabic +to a small number of roots, and as every root in +these languages consists of three consonants, the Semitic +languages have sometimes been called by the name +of triliteral. +</p> + +<p> +To a still higher degree the constituent elements are, +as it were, on the very surface in the Turanian family +of speech. It is one of the characteristic features of +that family, that, whatever the number of prefixes and +suffixes, the root must always stand out in full relief, +and must never be allowed to suffer by its contact with +derivative elements. +</p> + +<p> +There is one language, the Chinese, in which no +analysis of any kind is required for the discovery of its +component parts. It is a language in which no coalescence +<pb n='273'/><anchor id='Pg273'/> +of roots has taken place: every word is a root, +and every root is a word. It is, in fact, the most primitive +stage in which we can imagine human language +to have existed. It is language <emph>comme il faut</emph>; it is +what we should naturally have expected all languages +to be. +</p> + +<p> +There are, no doubt, numerous dialects in Asia, +Africa, America, and Polynesia, which have not yet +been dissected by the knife of the grammarian; but we +may be satisfied at least with this negative evidence, +that, as yet, no language which has passed through +the ordeal of grammatical analysis has ever disclosed +any but these two constituent elements. +</p> + +<p> +The problem, therefore, of the origin of language, +which seemed so perplexing and mysterious to the ancient +philosophers, assumes a much simpler aspect with +us. We have learnt what language is made of; we +have found that everything in language, except the +roots, is intelligible, and can be accounted for. There +is nothing to surprise us in the combination of the +predicative and demonstrative roots which led to the +building up of all the languages with which we are +acquainted, from Chinese to English. It is not only +conceivable, as Professor Pott remarks, <q>that the formation +of the Sanskrit language, as it is handed down +to us, may have been preceded by a state of the greatest +simplicity and entire absence of inflections, such +as is exhibited to the present day by the Chinese and +other monosyllabic languages.</q> It is absolutely impossible +that it should have been otherwise. After we +have seen that all languages must have started from +this Chinese or monosyllabic stage, the only portion of +the problem of the origin of language that remains to +<pb n='274'/><anchor id='Pg274'/> +be solved is this: How can we account for the origin +of those predicative and demonstrative roots which form +the constituent elements of all human speech, and +which have hitherto resisted all attempts at further +analysis? This problem will form the subject of our +two next Lectures. +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='275'/><anchor id='Pg275'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Lecture VIII. Morphological Classification.</head> + +<p> +We finished in our last Lecture our analysis of language, +and we arrived at the result that <emph>predicative</emph> and +<emph>demonstrative</emph> roots are the sole constituent elements of +human speech. +</p> + +<p> +We now turn back in order to discover how many +possible forms of language may be produced by the free +combination of these constituent elements; and we +shall then endeavor to find out whether each of these +possible forms has its real counterpart in some or other of +the dialects of mankind. We are attempting in fact to +carry out a <emph>morphological classification</emph> of speech, which +is based entirely on the form or manner in which roots +are put together, and therefore quite independent of the +genealogical classification which, according to its very +nature, is based on the formations of language handed +down ready made from generation to generation. +</p> + +<p> +Before, however, we enter on this, the principal subject +of our present Lecture, we have still to examine, +as briefly as possible, a second family of speech, which, +like the Aryan, is established on the strictest principles +of genealogical classification, namely, the <emph>Semitic</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +The Semitic family is divided into three branches, +the <emph>Aramaic</emph>, the <emph>Hebraic</emph>, and the +<emph>Arabic</emph>.<note place='foot'>Histoire Générale et +Système Comparé des Langues sémitiques, par +Ernest Renan. Seconde édition. Paris, 1858.</note> +</p> + +<pb n='276'/><anchor id='Pg276'/> + +<p> +The <emph>Aramaic</emph> occupies the north, including Syria, +Mesopotamia, and part of the ancient kingdoms of Babylonia +and Assyria. It is known to us chiefly in two +dialects, the <emph>Syriac</emph> and <emph>Chaldee</emph>. The former name is +given to the language which has been preserved to us +in a translation of the Bible (the Peshito<note place='foot'><emph>Peshito</emph> +means simple. The Old Testament was translated from Hebrew, +the New Testament from Greek, about 200, if not earlier. Ephraem +Syrus lived in the middle of the fourth century. During the eighth and +ninth centuries the Nestorians of Syria acted as the instructors of the +Arabs. Their literary and intellectual supremacy began to fail in the +tenth century. It was revived for a time by Gregorius Barhebræus +(Abulfaraj) in the thirteenth century. See Renan, p. 257.</note>) ascribed to +the second century, and in the rich Christian literature +dating from the fourth. It is still spoken, though in a +very corrupt form, by the Nestorians of Kurdistan, near +the lakes of Van and Urmia, and by some Christian +tribes in Mesopotamia; and an attempt has been made +by the American missionaries,<note place='foot'>Messrs. Perkins +and Stoddard, the latter the author of a grammar, published +in the Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. v. 1.</note> stationed at Urmia, to +restore this dialect to some grammatical correctness by +publishing translations and a grammar of what they call +the Neo-Syriac language. +</p> + +<p> +The name of <emph>Chaldee</emph> has been given to the language +adopted by the Jews during the Babylonian captivity. +Though the Jews always retained a knowledge of their +sacred language, they soon began to adopt the dialect +of their conquerors, not for conversation only, but also +for literary composition.<note place='foot'>Renan, +p. 214 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>, <q>Le chaldéen biblique serait un dialecte araméen +légèrement hébraisé.</q></note> The book of Ezra contains +fragments in Chaldee, contemporaneous with the cuneiform +inscriptions of Darius and Xerxes, and several of +the apocryphal books, though preserved to us in Greek +only, were most likely composed originally in Chaldee, +<pb n='277'/><anchor id='Pg277'/> +and not in Hebrew. The so-called +<hi rend='italic'>Targums</hi><note place='foot'>Arabic, <emph>tarjam</emph>, to +explain; <emph>Dragoman</emph>, Arabic, <emph>tarjamân</emph>.</note> again, +or translations and paraphrases of the Old Testament, +written during the centuries immediately preceding and +following the Christian era,<note place='foot'>The +most ancient are those of Onkelos and Jonathan, in the second +century after Christ. Others are much later, later even than the Talmud. +Renan, p. 220.</note> give us another specimen +of the Aramaic, or the language of Babylonia, as transplanted +to Palestine. This Aramaic was the dialect +spoken by Christ and his disciples. The few authentic +words preserved in the New Testament as spoken +by our Lord in His own language, such as <emph>Talitha +kumi</emph>, <emph>Ephphatha</emph>, <emph>Abba</emph>, are not in Hebrew, but in the +Chaldee, or Aramaic, as then spoken by the +Jews.<note place='foot'>Renan, pp. 220-222.</note> +</p> + +<p> +After the destruction of Jerusalem the literature of +the Jews continued to be written in the same dialect. +The Talmud<note place='foot'><hi rend='italic'>Talmud</hi> +(instruction) consists of <hi rend='italic'>Mishna</hi> and +<hi rend='italic'>Gemara</hi>. <hi rend='italic'>Mishna</hi> means +repetition, viz. of the Law. It was collected and written down about 218, +by Jehuda. <hi rend='italic'>Gemara</hi> is a continuation and commentary of the Mishna; +that of Jerusalem was finished towards the end of the fourth, that of Babylon +towards the end of the fifth, century.</note> of Jerusalem of the fourth, and that +of Babylon of the fifth, century exhibit the Aramean, +as spoken by the educated Jews settled in these two +localities, though greatly depraved and spoiled by an admixture +of strange elements. This language remained +the literary idiom of the Jews to the tenth century. +The <hi rend='italic'>Masora</hi>,<note place='foot'>First printed +in the Rabbinic Bible, Venice, 1525.</note> and the traditional commentary of the Old +Testament, was written in it about that time. Soon +after the Jews adopted Arabic as their literary language, +and retained it to the thirteenth century. They +then returned to a kind of modernized Hebrew, which +they still continue to employ for learned discussions. +</p> + +<pb n='278'/><anchor id='Pg278'/> + +<p> +It is curious that the Aramaic branch of the Semitic +family, though originally the language of the great +kingdoms of Babylon and Nineveh, should have been +preserved to us only in the literature of the Jews, and +of the Christians of Syria. There must have been a +Babylonian literature, for the wisdom of the Chaldeans +had acquired a reputation which could hardly have +been sustained without a literature. Abraham must +have spoken Aramaic before he emigrated to Canaan. +Laban spoke the same dialect, and the name which he +gave to the heap of stones that was to be a witness +between him and Jacob, (Jegar-sahadutha) is Syriac, +whereas Galeed, the name by which Jacob called it, +is Hebrew.<note place='foot'>Quatremère, Mémoire +sur les Nabatéens, p. 139.</note> If we are ever to recover a knowledge +of that ancient Babylonian literature, it must +be from the cuneiform inscriptions lately brought home +from Babylon and Nineveh. They are clearly written +in a Semitic language. About this there can +be no longer any doubt. And though the progress +in deciphering them has been slow, and slower than +was at one time expected, yet there is no reason to +despair. In a letter, dated April, 1853, Sir Henry +Rawlinson wrote:— +</p> + +<p> +<q>On the clay tablets which we have found at Nineveh, +and which now are to be counted by thousands, +there are explanatory treatises on almost every subject +under the sun: the art of writing, grammars, and dictionaries, +notation, weights and measures, divisions of +time, chronology, astronomy, geography, history, mythology, +geology, botany, &c. In fact we have now at +our disposal a perfect cyclopædia of Assyrian science.</q> +Considering what has been achieved in deciphering one +<pb n='279'/><anchor id='Pg279'/> +class of cuneiform inscriptions, the Persian, there is no +reason to doubt that the whole of that cyclopædia will +some day be read with the same ease with which we +read the mountain records of Darius. +</p> + +<p> +There is, however, another miserable remnant of +what was once the literature of the Chaldeans or +Babylonians, namely, the <q>Book of Adam,</q> and similar +works preserved by the <hi rend='italic'>Mendaïtes</hi> +or <hi rend='italic'>Nasoreans</hi>, a curious +sect settled near Bassora. Though the composition +of these works is as late as the tenth century after +Christ, it has been supposed that under a modern crust +of wild and senseless hallucinations, they contain some +grains of genuine ancient Babylonian thought. These +<hi rend='italic'>Mendaïtes</hi> have in +fact been identified with the <hi rend='italic'>Nabateans</hi>, +who are mentioned as late as the tenth century<note place='foot'>Renan, p. 241.</note> +of our era, as a race purely pagan, and distinct from +Jews, Christians, and Mohammedans. In Arabic the +name Nabatean<note place='foot'>Ibid. p. 237.</note> is used for Babylonians,—nay, +all the people of Aramaic origin, settled in the earliest +times between the Euphrates and Tigris are referred +to by that name.<note place='foot'>Quatremère, Mémoire +sur les Nabatéens, p. 116.</note> It is supposed that the Nabateans, +who are mentioned about the beginning of the Christian +era as a race distinguished for their astronomical +and general scientific knowledge, were the ancestors +of the mediæval Nabateans, and the descendants of +the ancient Babylonians and Chaldeans. You may +have lately seen in some literary journals an account +of a work called <q>The Nabatean Agriculture.</q> It +exists only in an Arabic translation by Ibn-Wahshiyyah, +the Chaldean,<note place='foot'>Ibn-Wahshiyyah was a Mussulman, but his family had been +converted for three generations only. He translated a collection of Nabatean books. +Three have been preserved, 1, the Nabatean Agriculture; 2, the book on +poisons; 3, the book of Tenkelusha (Teucros) the Babylonian; besides +fragments of the book of the secrets of the Sun and Moon. The Nabatean +Agriculture was referred by Quatremère (Journal Asiatique, 1835) to the +period between Belesis who delivered the Babylonians from their Median +masters, and the taking of Babylon by Cyrus. Prof. Chwolson, of St. Petersburg, +who has examined all the MSS., places Kuthami at the beginning +of the thirteenth ceatury <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi></note> +who lived about 900 years +<pb n='280'/><anchor id='Pg280'/> +after Christ, but the original, which was written by +Kuthami in Aramean, has lately been referred to +the beginning of the thirteenth century <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi> The +evidence is not yet fully before us, but from what is +known it seems more likely that this work was the +compilation of a Nabatean, who lived about the fourth +century after Christ;<note place='foot'>Renan, Mémoire +sur l'âge du livre intitulé Agriculture Nabatéenne, +p. 38. Paris, 1860.</note> and though it contains ancient +traditions, which may go back to the days of the great +Babylonian monarchs, these traditions can hardly be +taken as a fair representation of the ancient civilization +of the Aramean race. +</p> + +<p> +The second branch of the Semitic family is the <emph>Hebraic</emph>, +chiefly represented by the ancient language of +Palestine, where Hebrew was spoken and written from +the days of Moses to the times of Nehemiah and the +Maccabees, though of course with considerable modifications, +and with a strong admixture of Aramean +forms, particularly since the Babylonian captivity, and +the rise of a powerful civilization in the neighboring +country of Syria. The ancient language of Phœnicia, +to judge from inscriptions, was most closely allied to +Hebrew, and the language of the Carthaginians too +must be referred to the same branch. +</p> + +<p> +Hebrew was first encroached upon by Aramaic dialects, +through the political ascendency of Babylon, and +<pb n='281'/><anchor id='Pg281'/> +still more of Syria; and was at last swept away by +Arabic, which, since the conquest of Palestine and +Syria in the year 636, has monopolized nearly the +whole area formerly occupied by the two older branches +of the Semitic stock, the Aramaic and Hebrew. +</p> + +<p> +This third, or Arabic, branch sprang from the Arabian +peninsula, where it is still spoken by a compact +mass of aboriginal inhabitants. Its most ancient documents +are the <emph>Himyaritic</emph> inscriptions. In very early +times this Arabic branch was transplanted to Africa, +where, south of Egypt and Nubia, on the coast opposite +Yemen, an ancient Semitic dialect has maintained +itself to the present day. This is the <emph>Ethiopic</emph> or <emph>Abyssinian</emph>, +or, as it is called by the people themselves, the +<emph>Gees</emph> language. Though no longer spoken in its purity +by the people of Habesh, it is still preserved in their +sacred writings, translations of the Bible, and similar +works, which date from the third and fourth centuries. +The modern language of Abyssinia is called <emph>Amharic</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +The earliest literary documents of Arabic go back +beyond Mohammed. They are called <emph>Moallakat</emph>, literally, +suspended poems, because they are said to have +been thus publicly exhibited at Mecca. They are old +popular poems, descriptive of desert life. With Mohammed +Arabic became the language of a victorious +religion, and established its sway over Asia, Africa, +and Europe. +</p> + +<p> +These three branches, the Aramaic, the Hebraic, +and Arabic, are so closely related to each other, that +it was impossible not to recognize their common origin. +Every root in these languages, as far back as we know +them, must consist of three consonants, and numerous +<pb n='282'/><anchor id='Pg282'/> +words are derived from these roots by a simple change +of vowels, leaving the consonantal skeleton as much +as possible intact. It is impossible to mistake a Semitic +language; and what is most important—it is +impossible to imagine an Aryan language derived +from a Semitic, or a Semitic from an Aryan language. +The grammatical framework is totally distinct in these +two families of speech. This does not exclude, however, +the possibility that both are diverging streams of +the same source; and the comparisons that have been +instituted between the Semitic roots, reduced to their +simplest form, and the roots of the Aryan languages, +have made it more than probable that the material elements +with which they both started were originally the +same. +</p> + +<p> +Other languages which are supposed to belong to the +Semitic family are the <emph>Berber</emph> dialects of Northern +Africa, spoken on the coast from Egypt to the Atlantic +Ocean before the invasion of the Arabs, and now +pushed back towards the interior. Some other African +languages, too, such as the <emph>Haussa</emph> and <emph>Galla</emph>, have +been classed as Semitic; and the language of Egypt, +from the earliest hieroglyphic inscriptions to the Coptic, +which ceased to be spoken after the seventeenth century, +has equally been referred to this class. The +Semitic character of these dialects, however, is much +less clearly defined, and the exact degree of relationship +in which they stand to the Semitic languages, +properly so-called, has still to be determined. +</p> + +<p> +Strictly speaking the Aryan and Semitic are the +only <emph>families</emph> of speech which fully deserve that title. +They both presuppose the existence of a finished system +of grammar, previous to the first divergence of +<pb n='283'/><anchor id='Pg283'/> +their dialects. Their history is from the beginning a +history of decay rather than of growth, and hence the +unmistakable family-likeness which pervades every one +even of their latest descendants. The language of the +Sepoy and that of the English soldier are, strictly +speaking, one and the same language. They are both +built up of materials which were definitely shaped before +the Teutonic and Indic branches separated. No +new root has been added to either since their first separation; +and the grammatical forms which are of more +modern growth in English or Hindustání, are, if closely +examined, new combinations only of elements which +existed from the beginning in all the Aryan dialects. +In the termination of the English <emph>he is</emph>, and in the inaudible +termination of the French <emph>il est</emph>, we recognize +the result of an act performed before the first separation +of the Aryan family, the combination of the predicative +root <emph>as</emph> with the demonstrative root <emph>ti</emph>; an act +performed once for all, and continuing to be felt to the +present day. +</p> + +<p> +It was the custom of Nebuchadnezzar to have his +name stamped on every brick that was used during +his reign in erecting his colossal palaces. Those palaces +fell to ruins, but from the ruins the ancient materials +were carried away for building new cities; and on +examining the bricks in the walls of the modern city +of Baghdad on the borders of the Tigris, Sir Henry +Rawlinson discovered on each the clear traces of that +royal signature. It is the same if we examine the +structure of modern languages. They too were built +up with the materials taken from the ruins of the ancient +languages, and every word, if properly examined, +displays the visible stamp impressed upon it from the +<pb n='284'/><anchor id='Pg284'/> +first by the founders of the Aryan and the Semitic +empires of speech. +</p> + +<p> +The relationship of languages, however, is not always +so close. Languages may diverge before their +grammatical system has become fixed and hardened; +and in that case they cannot be expected to show the +same marked features of a common descent as, for +instance, the Neo-Latin dialects, French, Italian, and +Spanish. They may have much in common, but they +will likewise display an after-growth in words and +grammatical forms peculiar to each dialect. With regard +to words we see that even languages so intimately +related to each other as the six Romance dialects, +diverged in some of the commonest expressions. Instead +of the Latin <emph>frater</emph>, the French <emph>frère</emph>, we find in +Spanish <emph>hermano</emph>. There was a very good reason for +this change. The Latin word <emph>frater</emph>, changed into +<emph>fray</emph> and <emph>frayle</emph>, had been applied to express a brother +or a friar. It was felt inconvenient that the same word +should express two ideas which it was sometimes necessary +to distinguish, and therefore, by a kind of natural +elimination, <emph>frater</emph> was given up as the name of brother +in Spanish, and replaced from the dialectical stores of +Latin, by <emph>germanus</emph>. In the same manner the Latin +word for shepherd, <emph>pastor</emph>, was so constantly applied to +the shepherd of the people or the clergyman, <emph>le pasteur</emph>, +that a new word was wanted for the real shepherd. Thus +<emph>berbicarius</emph> from <emph>berbex</emph> or <emph>vervex</emph>, a wether, was +used instead of <emph>pastor</emph>, and changed into the French +<emph>berger</emph>. Instead of the Spanish <emph>enfermo</emph>, ill, we find in +French <emph>malade</emph>, in Italian <emph>malato</emph>. Languages so intimately +related as Greek and Latin have fixed on different +expressions for son, daughter, brother, woman, +<pb n='285'/><anchor id='Pg285'/> +man, sky, earth, moon, hand, mouth, tree, bird, +&c.<note place='foot'>See Letter on Turanian Languages, p. 62.</note> +That is to say, out of a large number of synonymes +which were supplied by the numerous dialects of the +Aryan family, the Greeks perpetuated one, the Romans +another. It is clear that when the working of +this principle of natural selection is allowed to extend +more widely, languages, though proceeding from the +same source, may in time acquire a totally different +nomenclature for the commonest objects. The number +of real synonymes is frequently exaggerated, and +if we are told that in Icelandic there are 120 names for +island, or in Arabic 500 names for lion,<note place='foot'>Renan, +Histoire des Langues sémitiques, p. 137.</note> and 1,000 +names for sword,<note place='foot'>Pococke, Notes to +Abulfaragius, p. 153; Glossology, p. 352.</note> many of these are no doubt purely +poetical. But even where there are in a language only +four or five names for the same objects, it is clear that +four languages might be derived from it, each in appearance +quite distinct from the rest. +</p> + +<p> +The same applies to grammar. When the Romance +languages, for instance, formed their new future by +placing the auxiliary verb <emph>habere</emph>, to have, after the +infinitive, it was quite open to any one of them to fix +upon some other expedient for expressing the future. +The French might have chosen <emph>je vais dire</emph> or <emph>je dirvais</emph> +(I wade to say) instead of <emph>je dirai</emph>, and in this +case the future in French would have been totally distinct +from the future in Italian. If such changes are +possible in literary languages of such long standing as +French and Italian, we must be prepared for a great +deal more in languages which, as I said, diverged before +any definite settlement had taken place either in their +<pb n='286'/><anchor id='Pg286'/> +grammar or their dictionary. If we were to expect in +them the definite criteria of a genealogical relationship +which unites the members of the Aryan and Semitic +families of speech, we should necessarily be disappointed. +Such criteria could not possibly exist in these +languages. But there are criteria for determining even +these more distant degrees of relationship in the vast +realm of speech; and they are sufficient at least to arrest +the hasty conclusions of those who would deny the +possibility of a common origin of any languages more +removed from each other than French and Italian, +Sanskrit and Greek, Hebrew and Arabic. You will +see this more clearly after we have examined the principles +of what I call the <emph>morphological classification</emph> of +human speech. +</p> + +<p> +As all languages, so far as we can judge at present, +can be reduced in the end to roots, predicative and +demonstrative, it is clear that, according to the manner +in which roots are put together, we may expect +to find three kinds of languages, or three stages in the +gradual formation of speech. +</p> + +<p> +1. Roots may be used as words, each root preserving +its full independence. +</p> + +<p> +2. Two roots may be joined together to form words, +and in these compounds one root may lose its independence. +</p> + +<p> +3. Two roots may be joined together to form words, +and in these compounds both roots may lose their independence. +</p> + +<p> +What applies to two roots, applies to three or four +or more. The principle is the same, though it would +lead to a more varied subdivision. +</p> + +<p> +The first stage, in which each root preserves its independence, +<pb n='287'/><anchor id='Pg287'/> +and in which there is no formal distinction +between a root and a word, I call the <emph>Radical Stage</emph>. +This stage is best represented by ancient Chinese. +Languages belonging to this first or Radical Stage, +have sometimes been called <emph>Monosyllabic</emph> or <emph>Isolating</emph>. +The second stage, in which two or more roots coalesce +to form a word, the one retaining its radical independence, +the other sinking down to a mere termination, +I call the <emph>Terminational Stage</emph>. This stage is best +represented by the Turanian family of speech, and the +languages belonging to it have generally been called +<emph>agglutinative</emph>, from <emph>gluten</emph>, glue. The third stage, in +which roots coalesce so that neither the one nor the +other retains its substantive independence, I call the +<emph>Inflectional Stage</emph>. This stage is best represented by +the Aryan and Semitic families, and the languages +belonging to it have sometimes been distinguished by +the name of <emph>organic</emph> or <emph>amalgamating</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +The first stage excludes phonetic corruption altogether. +</p> + +<p> +The second stage excludes phonetic corruption in +the principal root, but allows it in the secondary or +determinative elements. +</p> + +<p> +The third stage allows phonetic corruption both in +the principal root and in the terminations. +</p> + +<p> +A few instances will make this classification clearer. +</p> + +<p> +In the first stage, which is represented by Chinese, +every word is a root, and has its own substantial meaning. +Thus, where we say in Latin <emph>baculo</emph>, with a stick, +we say in Chinese <emph>ỳ ćáng</emph>.<note place='foot'>Endlicher, +Chinesische Grammatik, p. 223.</note> Here <emph>ỳ</emph> might be taken +for a mere preposition, like the English <emph>with</emph>. But in +Chinese this <emph>ỳ</emph> is a root; it is the same word which, +<pb n='288'/><anchor id='Pg288'/> +if used as a verb, would mean <q>to employ.</q> Therefore +in Chinese <emph>ỳ ćáng</emph> means literally <q>employ stick.</q> +Or again, where we say in English <emph>at home</emph>, or in Latin +<emph>domi</emph>, the Chinese say <emph>ŭŏ-li, ŭŏ</emph> meaning <emph>house</emph>, +and <emph>li</emph> originally <emph>inside</emph>.<note place='foot'>Endlicher, +Chinesische Grammatik, p. 339.</note> The name for <emph>day</emph> in Chinese +is <emph>ģi-tse</emph>, which means originally <emph>son of the +sun</emph>.<note place='foot'><q>In this word <emph>tse</emph> +(tseu) does not signify son; it is an addition of frequent +occurrence after nouns, adjectives, and verbs. Thus, <emph>lao</emph>, +old, + <emph>tseu</emph> is father; <emph>neï</emph>, the interior, + +<emph>tseu</emph> is wife; <emph>hiang</emph>, scent, + <emph>tseu</emph> is +clove; <emph>hoa</emph>, to beg, + <emph>tseu</emph>, a mendicant; +<emph>hi</emph>, to act, + <emph>tseu</emph>, an +actor.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Stanislas Julien</hi>.</note> +</p> + +<p> +There is in Chinese, as we saw before, no formal +distinction between a noun, a verb, an adjective, an +adverb, a preposition. The same root, according to +its position in a sentence, may be employed to convey +the meaning of great, greatness, greatly, and to be +great. Everything in fact depends in Chinese on the +proper collocation of words in a sentence. Thus <emph>ngò +tà ni</emph> means <q>I beat thee;</q> but <emph>ni tà ngò</emph> would mean +<q>Thou beatest me.</q> Thus <emph>ngŏ ģin</emph> means <q>a bad +man;</q> <emph>ģin ngŏ</emph> would mean <q>the man is bad.</q> +</p> + +<p> +As long as every word, or part of a word, is felt to +express its own radical meaning, a language belongs +to the first or radical stage. As soon as such words +as <emph>tse</emph> in <emph>ģi-tse</emph>, day, <emph>li</emph> +in <emph>ŭŏ-li</emph>, at home, or <emph>ỳ</emph> in <emph>ỳ-ćáng</emph>, +with the stick, lose their etymological meaning and +become mere signs of derivation or of case, language +enters into the second or <emph>Terminational</emph> stage. +</p> + +<p> +By far the largest number of languages belong to +this stage. The whole of what is called the <emph>Turanian</emph> +family of speech consists of Terminational or Agglutinative +languages, and this Turanian family comprises +in reality all languages spoken in Asia and Europe, +and not included under the Aryan and Semitic families, +<pb n='289'/><anchor id='Pg289'/> +with the exception of Chinese and its cognate +dialects. In the great continent of the Old World +the Semitic and Aryan languages occupy only what +may be called the four western peninsulas, namely, +India with Persia, Arabia, Asia Minor, and Europe; +and we have reason to suppose that even these countries +were held by Turanian tribes previous to the +arrival of the Aryan and Semitic nations. +</p> + +<p> +This Turanian family is of great importance in the +science of languages. Some scholars would deny it +the name of a family; and if family is only applicable +to dialects so closely connected among themselves as +the Aryan or Semitic, it would no doubt be preferable +to speak of the Turanian as a class or group, and not +as a family of languages. But this concession must +not be understood as an admission that the members +of this class start from different sources, and that +they are held together, not by genealogical affinity, +but by morphological similarity only. +</p> + +<p> +These languages share elements in common which +they must have borrowed from the same source, and +their formal coincidences, though of a different character +from those of the Aryan and Semitic families, +are such that it would be impossible to ascribe them +to mere accident. +</p> + +<p> +The name Turanian is used in opposition to Aryan, +and is applied to the nomadic races of Asia as opposed +to the agricultural or Aryan races. +</p> + +<p> +The Turanian family or class consists of two great +divisions, the <emph>Northern</emph> and the <emph>Southern</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +The Northern is sometimes called the <emph>Ural-Altaic</emph> or +<emph>Ugro-Tataric</emph>, and it is divided into five sections, the +<emph>Tungusic</emph>, <emph>Mongolic</emph>, <emph>Turkic</emph>, +<emph>Finnic</emph>, and <emph>Samoyedic</emph>. +</p> + +<pb n='290'/><anchor id='Pg290'/> + +<p> +The Southern, which occupies the south of Asia, is +divided into four classes, the <emph>Tamulic</emph>, or the languages +of the Dekhan; the <emph>Bhotîya</emph>, or the dialects of Tibet +and Bhotan; the <emph>Taïc</emph>, or the dialects of Siam, +and the <emph>Malaic</emph>, or the Malay and Polynesian dialects. +</p> + +<p> +No doubt if we expected to find in this immense +number of languages the same family likeness which +holds the Semitic or Aryan languages together, we +should be disappointed. But the very absence of that +family likeness constitutes one of the distinguishing +features of the Turanian dialects. They are <emph>Nomad</emph> +languages, as contrasted with the Aryan, and Semitic +languages.<note place='foot'>Letter on the +Turanian Languages, p. 24.</note> In the latter most words and grammatical +forms were thrown out but once by the creative +power of one generation, and they were not lightly +parted with, even though their original distinctness +had been blurred by phonetic corruption. To hand +down a language in this manner is possible only among +people whose history runs on in one main stream; and +where religion, law, and poetry supply well-defined borders +which hem in on every side the current of language. +Among the Turanian nomads no such nucleus +of a political, social, or literary character has ever been +formed. Empires were no sooner founded than they +were scattered again like the sand-clouds of the desert; +no laws, no songs, no stories outlived the age of their +authors. How quickly language can change, if thus +left to itself without any literary standard, we saw in +a former Lecture, when treating of the growth of dialects. +The most necessary substantives, such as father, +mother, daughter, son, have frequently been lost and +<pb n='291'/><anchor id='Pg291'/> +replaced by synonymes in the different dialects of Turanian +speech, and the grammatical terminations have +been treated with the same freedom. Nevertheless, +some of the Turanian numerals and pronouns, and +many Turanian roots, point to a single original source; +and the common words and common roots, which have +been discovered in the most distant branches of the +Turanian stock, warrant the admission of a real, though +very distant, genealogical relationship of all Turanian +speech. +</p> + +<p> +The most characteristic feature of the Turanian languages +is what has been called <emph>Agglutination</emph>, or <q>gluing +together.</q><note place='foot'>Survey of +Languages, p. 90.</note> This means not only that, in their +grammar, pronouns are <emph>glued</emph> to the verbs in order to +form the conjugation, or prepositions to substantives in +order to form declension. <emph>That</emph> would not be a distinguishing +characteristic of the Turanian or nomad languages; +for in Hebrew as well as in Sanskrit, conjugation +and declension were originally formed on the same +principle. What distinguishes the Turanian languages +is, that in them the conjugation and declension can still +be taken to pieces; and although the terminations have +by no means always retained their significative power +as independent words, they are felt as modificatory syllables, +and as distinct from the roots to which they are +appended. +</p> + +<p> +In the Aryan languages the modifications of words, +comprised under declension and conjugation, were likewise +originally expressed by agglutination. But the +component parts began soon to coalesce, so as to form +one integral word, liable in its turn to phonetic corruption +to such an extent that it became impossible after a +<pb n='292'/><anchor id='Pg292'/> +time to decide which was the root and which the modificatory +element. The difference between an Aryan and +a Turanian language is somewhat the same as between +good and bad mosaic. The Aryan words seem made of +one piece, the Turanian words clearly show the sutures +and fissures where the small stones are cemented +together. +</p> + +<p> +There was a very good reason why the Turanian +languages should have remained in this second or +agglutinative stage. It was felt essential that the radical +portion of each word should stand out in distinct relief, +and never be obscured or absorbed, as happens in the +third or inflectional stage. +</p> + +<p> +The French <emph>âge</emph>, for instance, has lost its whole material +body, and is nothing but termination. <emph>Age</emph> in +old French was <emph>eage</emph> and <emph>edage</emph>. <emph>Edage</emph> is a +corruption of the Latin <emph>œtaticum</emph>; <emph>œtaticum</emph> is a derivative of +<emph>œtas</emph>; <emph>œtas</emph> an abbreviation of <emph>œvitas</emph>; +<emph>œvitas</emph> is derived +from <emph>œvum</emph>, and in <emph>œvum</emph>, <emph>œ</emph> only is the radical +or predicative element, the Sanskrit <emph>ây</emph> in <emph>ây-us</emph>, life, +which contains the germ from which these various +words derive their life and meaning. From <emph>œvum</emph> +the Romans derived <emph>œviternus</emph>, contracted into <emph>œternus</emph>, +so that <emph>age</emph> and <emph>eternity</emph> flow from the same +source. What trace of <emph>œ</emph> or <emph>œvum</emph>, or even <emph>œvitas</emph> +and <emph>œtas</emph>, remains in <emph>âge</emph>? Turanian languages cannot +afford such words as <emph>âge</emph> in their dictionaries. It +is an indispensable requirement in a nomadic language +that it should be intelligible to many, though +their intercourse be but scanty. It requires tradition, +society, and literature, to maintain words and +forms which can no longer be analyzed at once. Such +words would seldom spring up in nomadic languages, +<pb n='293'/><anchor id='Pg293'/> +or if they did, they would die away with each generation. +</p> + +<p> +The Aryan verb contains many forms in which the +personal pronoun is no longer felt distinctly. And yet +tradition, custom, and law preserve the life of these +veterans, and make us feel unwilling to part with them. +But in the ever-shifting state of a nomadic society no +debased coin can be tolerated in language, no obscure +legend accepted on trust. The metal must be pure, +and the legend distinct; that the one may be weighed, +and the other, if not deciphered, at least recognized as +a well-known guarantee. Hence the small proportion +of irregular forms in all agglutinative languages.<note place='foot'>The Abbé +Molina states that the language of Chili is entirely free +from irregular forms. Du Ponceau, Mémoire, p. 90.</note> +</p> + +<p> +A Turanian might tolerate the Sanskrit, +</p> + +<lg> +<l>as-mi, a-si, as-ti, 's-mas, 's-tha, 's-anti,</l> +<l>I am, thou art, he is, we are, you are, they are;</l> +</lg> + +<p> +or even the Latin, +</p> + +<lg> +<l>'s-um, e-s, es-t, 'su-mus, es-tis, 'sunt.</l> +</lg> + +<p> +In these instances, with a few exceptions, root and +affix are as distinguishable as, for instance, in Turkish: +</p> + +<lg> +<l>bakar-im, bakar-sin, bakar,</l> +<l>I regard, thou regardest, he regards.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>bakar-iz, bakar-siniz, bakar-lar</l> +<l>we regard, you regard, they regard.</l> +</lg> + +<p> +But a conjugation like the Hindustání, which is a modern +Aryan dialect, +</p> + +<lg> +<l>hun, hai, hai, hain, ho, hain,</l> +</lg> + +<p> +would not be compatible with the genius of the Turanian +languages, because it would not answer the +requirements of a nomadic life. Turanian dialects +<pb n='294'/><anchor id='Pg294'/> +exhibit either no terminational distinctions at all, as +in Mandshu, which is a Tungusic dialect; or a complete +and intelligible system of affixes, as in the spoken +dialect of Nyertchinsk, equally of Tungusic descent. +But a state of conjugation in which, through phonetic +corruption, the suffix of the first person singular and +plural, and of the third person plural are the same, +where there is no distinction between the second and +third persons singular, and between the first and third +persons plural, would necessarily lead, in a Turanian +dialect, to the adoption of new and more expressive +forms. New pronouns would have to be used to mark +the persons, or some other expedient be resorted to for +the same purpose. +</p> + +<p> +And this will make it still more clear why the +Turanian languages, or in fact all languages in this +second or agglutinative stage, though protected against +phonetic corruption more than the Aryan and Semitic +languages, are so much exposed to the changes produced +by dialectical regeneration. A Turanian retains, +as it were, the consciousness of his language and +grammar. The idea, for instance, which he connects +with a plural is that of a noun followed by a syllable +indicative of plurality; a passive with him is a verb +followed by a syllable expressive of suffering, or eating, +or going.<note place='foot'>Letter on +Turanian Languages, p. 206.</note> Now these determinative ideas may be +expressed in various ways, and though in one and the +same clan, and during one period of time, a certain +number of terminations would become stationary, and +be assigned to the expression of certain grammatical +categories, such as the plural, the passive, the genitive, +different hordes, as they separated, would still feel +<pb n='295'/><anchor id='Pg295'/> +themselves at liberty to repeat the process of grammatical +composition, and defy the comparative grammarian +to prove the identity of the terminations, even +in dialects so closely allied as Finnish and Hungarian, +or Tamil and Telugu. +</p> + +<p> +It must not be supposed, however, that Turanian or +agglutinative languages are forever passing through +this process of grammatical regeneration. Where nomadic +tribes approach to a political organization, their +language, though Turanian, may approach to the system +of political or traditional languages, such as Sanskrit +or Hebrew. This is indeed the case with the most +advanced members of the Turanian family, the Hungarian, +the Finnish, the Tamil, Telugu, &c. Many +of their grammatical terminations have suffered by +phonetic corruption, but they have not been replaced +by new and more expressive words. The termination +of the plural is <emph>lu</emph> in Telugu, and this is probably a +mere corruption of <emph>gaḷ.</emph>, the termination of the plural +in Tamil. The only characteristic Turanian feature +which always remains is this: the root is never obscured. +Besides this, the determining or modifying +syllables are generally placed at the end, and the +vowels do not become so absolutely fixed for each +syllable as in Sanskrit or Hebrew. On the contrary, +there is what is called the Law of Harmony, according +to which the vowels of each word may be changed and +modulated so as to harmonize with the key-note struck +by its chief vowel. The vowels in Turkish, for instance, +are divided into two classes, <emph>sharp</emph> and <emph>flat</emph>. If +a verb contains a sharp vowel in its radical portion, +the vowels of the terminations are all sharp, while +the same terminations, if following a root with a +<pb n='296'/><anchor id='Pg296'/> +flat vowel, modulate their own vowels into the flat +key. Thus we have <emph>sev-mek</emph>, to love, but <emph>bak-mak</emph>, +to regard, <emph>mek</emph> or <emph>mak</emph> being the termination of the +infinitive. Thus we say, <emph>ev-ler</emph>, the houses, but <emph>at-lar</emph>, +the horses, <emph>ler</emph> or <emph>lar</emph> being the termination of the plural. +</p> + +<p> +No Aryan or Semitic language has preserved a similar +freedom in the harmonic arrangement of its vowels, +while traces of it have been found among the most distant +members of the Turanian family, as in Hungarian, +Mongolian, Turkish, the Yakut, spoken in the +north of Siberia, and in dialects spoken on the eastern +frontiers of India. +</p> + +<p> +For completeness' sake I add a short account of the +Turanian family, chiefly taken from my Survey of +Languages, published 1855:— +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Tungusic Class.</hi> +</p> + +<p> +The <emph>Tungusic</emph> branch extends from China northward +to Siberia and westward to 113°, where the +river Tunguska partly marks its frontier. The Tungusic +tribes in Siberia are under Russian sway. +Other Tungusic tribes belong to the Chinese empire, +and are known by the name of Mandshu, a name +taken after they had conquered China in 1644, and +founded the present imperial dynasty. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Mongolic Class.</hi> +</p> + +<p> +The original seats of the people who speak Mongolic +dialects lie near the Lake Baikal and in the +eastern parts of Siberia, where we find them as early +as the ninth century after Christ. They were divided +into three classes, the <emph>Mongols</emph> proper, the <emph>Buriäts</emph>, and +the <emph>Ölöts</emph> or <emph>Kalmüks</emph>. Chingis-khán (1227) united +<pb n='297'/><anchor id='Pg297'/> +them into a nation and founded the Mongolian empire, +which included, however, not only Mongolic, but +Tungusic and Turkic, commonly called Tataric, tribes. +</p> + +<p> +The name of Tatar soon became the terror of Asia +and Europe, and it was applied promiscuously to all +the nomadic warriors whom Asia then poured forth +over Europe. Originally Tatar was a name of the +Mongolic races, but through their political ascendency +in Asia after Chingis-khán, it became usual to call +all the tribes which were under Mongolian sway by +the name of Tatar. In linguistic works Tataric is +now used in two several senses. Following the example +of writers of the Middle Ages, Tataric, like +Scythian in Greek, has been fixed upon as the general +term comprising <emph>all</emph> languages spoken by the nomadic +tribes of Asia. Hence it is used sometimes in the +same sense in which we use Turanian. Secondly, +Tataric has become the name of that class of Turanian +languages of which the Turkish is the most +prominent member. While the Mongolic class—that +which in fact has the greatest claims to the name of +Tataric—is never so called, it has become an almost +universal custom to apply this name to the third or +Turkic branch of the Ural-Altaic division; and the +races belonging to this branch have in many instances +themselves adopted the name. These Turkish, or as +they are more commonly called, Tataric races, were +settled on the northern side of the Caspian Sea, and +on the Black Sea, and were known as Komanes, +Pechenegs, and Bulgars, when conquered by the +Mongolic army of the son of Chingis-khán, who +founded the Kapchakian empire, extending from the +Dniestr to the Yemba and the Kirgisian steppes. +Russia for two centuries was under the sway of these +<pb n='298'/><anchor id='Pg298'/> +Kháns, known as the Khans of the Golden Horde. +This empire was dissolved towards the end of the +fifteenth century, and several smaller kingdoms rose +out of its ruins. Among these Krim, Kasan, and +Astrachan, were the most important. The princes +of these kingdoms still gloried in their descent from +Chingis-khán, and had hence a right to the name of +Mongols or Tatars. But their armies and subjects +also, who were of Turkish blood, received the name +of their princes; and their languages continued to be +called Tataric, even after the tribes by whom they +were spoken had been brought under the Russian +sceptre, and were no longer governed by khans of +Mongolic or Tataric origin. It would perhaps be desirable +to use Turkic instead of Tataric, when speaking +of the third branch of the northern division of the +Turanian family, did not a change of terminology +generally produce as much confusion as it remedies. +The recollection of their non-Tataric, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> non-Mongolic +origin, remains, it appears, among the so-called +Tatars of Kasan and Astrachan. If asked whether +they are Tatars, they reply no; and they call their +language Turki or Turuk, but not Tatari. Nay, they +consider Tatar as a term of abuse, synonymous with +robber, evidently from a recollection that their ancestors +had once been conquered and enslaved by Mongolic, +that is, Tataric, tribes. All this rests on the +authority of Klaproth, who during his stay in Russia +had great opportunities of studying the languages spoken +on the frontiers of this half-Asiatic empire. +</p> + +<p> +The conquests of the Mongols or the descendants of +Chingis-khán were not confined, however, to these +Turkish tribes. They conquered China in the east, +where they founded the Mongolic dynasty of Yuan, +<pb n='299'/><anchor id='Pg299'/> +and in the west, after subduing the khalifs of Bagdad, +and the Sultans of Iconium, they conquered Moscow, +and devastated the greater part of Russia. In 1240 +they invaded Poland, in 1241 Silesia. Here they +recoiled before the united armies of Germany, Poland, +and Silesia. They retired into Moravia, and having +exhausted that country, occupied Hungary. At that +time they had to choose a new khan, which could +only be done at Karakorum, the old capital of their +empire. Thither they withdrew to elect an emperor +to govern an empire which then extended from China +to Poland, from India to Siberia. But a realm of such +vast proportions could not be long held together, and +towards the end of the thirteenth century it broke up +into several independent states, all under Mongolian +princes, but no longer under one khan of khans. Thus +new independent Mongolic empires arose in China, +Turkestan, Siberia, Southern Russia, and Persia. In +1360, the Mongolian dynasty was driven out of China; +in the fifteenth century they lost their hold on Russia. +In Central Asia they rallied once more under Timur +(1369), whose sway was again acknowledged from +Karakorum to Persia and Anatolia. But in 1468, this +empire also fell by its own weight, and for want of +powerful rulers like Chingis-khán or Timur. In Jagatai +alone, the country extending from the Aral Lake +to the Hindu-kush, between the rivers Oxus and +Yaxartes (Jihon and Sihon), and once governed by +Jagatai, the son of Chingis-khán—the Mongolian dynasty +maintained itself, and thence it was that Baber, +a descendant of Timur, conquered India, and founded +there a Mongolian dynasty, surviving up to our +own times in the Great Moguls of Delhi. Most +Mongolic tribes are now under the sway of the nations +<pb n='300'/><anchor id='Pg300'/> +whom they once had conquered, the Tungusic +sovereigns of China, the Russian czars, and the Turkish +sultans. +</p> + +<p> +The Mongolic language, although spoken (but not +continuously) from China as far as the Volga, has +given rise to but few dialects. Next to Tungusic, +the Mongolic is the poorest language of the Turanian +family, and the scantiness of grammatical terminations +accounts for the fact that, as a language, it has remained +very much unchanged. There is, however, a +distinction between the language as spoken by the +Eastern, Western, and Northern tribes, and incipient +traces of grammatical life have lately been discovered +by Castrén, the great Swedish traveller and Turanian +philologist, in the spoken dialect of the Buriäts. In +it the persons of the verb are distinguished by affixes, +while, according to the rules of Mongolic grammar, +no other dialect distinguishes in the verb between am<emph>o</emph>, +am<emph>as</emph>, am<emph>at</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +The Mongols who live in Europe have fixed their +tents on each side of the Volga and along the coast of +the Caspian Sea near Astrachan. Another colony is +found south-east of Sembirsk. They belong to the +Western branch, and are Ölöts or Kalmüks, who left +their seats on the Koko-nur, and entered Europe in +1662. They proceeded from the clans Dürbet and +Torgod, but most of the Torgods returned again in +1770, and their descendants are now scattered over +the Kirgisian steppes. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Turkic Class</hi>. +</p> + +<p> +Much more important are the languages belonging +to the third branch of the Turanian family, most +prominent among which is the Turkish or Osmanli of +<pb n='301'/><anchor id='Pg301'/> +Constantinople. The number of the Turkish inhabitants +of European Turkey is indeed small. It is generally +stated at 2,000,000; but Shafarik estimates the +number of genuine Turks at not more than 700,000, +who rule over fifteen millions of people. The different +Turkic dialects of which the Osmanli is one, occupy +one of the largest linguistic areas, extending from the +Lena and the Polar Sea, down to the Adriatic. +</p> + +<p> +The most ancient name by which the Turkic tribes +of Central Asia were known to the Chinese was +Hiung-nu. These Hiung-nu founded an empire (206 +<hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi>) comprising a large portion of Asia, west of +China. Engaged in frequent wars with the Chinese, +they were defeated at last in the middle of the first +century after Christ. Thereupon they divided into a +northern and southern empire; and, after the southern +Hiung-nu had become subjects of China, they attacked +the northern Hiung-nu, together with the Chinese, +and, driving them out of their seats between the rivers +Amur and Selenga, and the Altai mountains, westward, +they are supposed to have given the first impulse +to the inroads of the barbarians into Europe. In the +beginning of the third century, the Mongolic and Tungusic +tribes, who had filled the seats of the northern +Hiung-nu, had grown so powerful as to attack the +southern Hiung-nu and drive them from their territories. +This occasioned a second migration of Asiatic +tribes towards the west. +</p> + +<p> +Another name by which the Chinese designate these +Hiung-nu or Turkish tribes is Tu-kiu. This Tu-kiu +is supposed to be identical with Turk, and, although +the tribe to which this name was given was originally +but small, it began to spread in the sixth century from +<pb n='302'/><anchor id='Pg302'/> +the Altai to the Caspian, and it was probably to them +that in 569 the Emperor Justinian sent an ambassador +in the person of Semarchos. The empire of the Tu-kiu +was destroyed in the eighth century, by the 'Hui-'he +(Chinese Kao-che). This tribe, equally of Turkish +origin, maintained itself for about a century, and was +then conquered by the Chinese and driven back from +the northern borders of China. Part of the 'Hui-'he +occupied Tangut, and, after a second defeat by the +Mongolians in 1257, the remnant proceeded still further +west, and joined the Uigurs, whose tents were +pitched near the towns of Turfan, 'Kashgar, 'Hamil, +and Aksu. +</p> + +<p> +These facts, gleaned chiefly from Chinese historians, +show from the very earliest times the westward tendency +of the Turkish nations. In 568 Turkish tribes +occupied the country between the Volga and the sea +of Azov, and numerous reinforcements have since +strengthened their position in those parts. +</p> + +<p> +The northern part of Persia, west of the Caspian +Sea, Armenia, the south of Georgia, Shirwan, and +Dagestan, harbor a Turkic population, known by the +general name of Turkman or Kisil-bash (Red-caps). +They are nomadic robbers, and their arrival in these +countries dates from the eleventh and twelfth centuries. +</p> + +<p> +East of the Caspian Sea the Turkman tribes are under +command of the Usbek-Khans of Khiva, Fergana, +and Bukhára. They call themselves, however, not +subjects but guests of these Khans. Still more to the +east the Turkmans are under Chinese sovereignty, and +in the south-west they reach as far as Khorasan and +other provinces of Persia. +</p> + +<p> +The Usbeks, descendants of the 'Huy-'he and Uigurs, +<pb n='303'/><anchor id='Pg303'/> +and originally settled in the neighborhood of the towns +of 'Hoten, Kashgar, Turfan, and 'Hamil, crossed the +Yaxartes in the sixteenth century, and after several +successful campaigns gained possession of Balkh, Kharism +(Khiva), Bukhára, and Ferganah. In the latter +country and in Balkh they have become agricultural; +but generally their life is nomadic, and too warlike to +be called pastoral. +</p> + +<p> +Another Turkish tribe are the Nogái, west of the +Caspian, and also north of the Black Sea. To the +beginning of the seventeenth century they lived north-east +of the Caspian, and the steppes on the left of the +Irtish bore their name. Pressed by the Kalmüks, a +Mongolic tribe, the Nogáis advanced westward as far +as Astrachan. Peter I. transferred them thence to the +north of the Caucasian mountains, where they still +graze their flocks on the shores of the Kuban and +the Kuma. One horde, that of Kundur, remained on +the Volga, subject to the Kalmüks. +</p> + +<p> +Another tribe of Turkish origin in the Caucasus are +the Bazianes. They now live near the sources of the +Kuban, but before the fifteenth century within the +town Majari, on the Kuma. +</p> + +<p> +A third Turkish tribe in the Caucasus are the +Kumüks on the rivers Sunja, Aksai, and Koisu: now +subjects of Russia, though under native princes. +</p> + +<p> +The southern portion of the Altaic mountains has +long been inhabited by the Bashkirs, a race considerably +mixed with Mongolic blood, savage and ignorant, +subjects of Russia, and Mohammedans by faith. Their +land is divided into four Roads, called the Roads of +Siberia, of Kasan, of Nogai, and of Osa, a place on +the Kama. Among the Bashkirs, and in villages +<pb n='304'/><anchor id='Pg304'/> +near Ufa, is now settled a Turkish tribe, the Mescheräks +who formerly lived near the Volga. +</p> + +<p> +The tribes near the Lake of Aral are called Kara-Kalpak. +They are subject partly to Russia, partly to +the Khans of Khiva. +</p> + +<p> +The Turks of Siberia, commonly called Tatars, are +partly original settlers, who crossed the Ural, and +founded the Khanat of Sibir, partly later colonists. +Their chief towns are Tobolsk, Yeniseisk, and Tomsk. +Separate tribes are the Uran'hat on the Chulym, and +the Barabas in the steppes between the Irtish and the +Ob. +</p> + +<p> +The dialects of these Siberian Turks are considerably +intermingled with foreign words, taken from Mongolic, +Samoyedic, or Russian sources. Still they resemble +one another closely in all that belongs to the +original stock of the language. +</p> + +<p> +In the north-east of Asia, on both sides of the river +Lena, the <emph>Yakuts</emph> form the most remote link in the +Turkic chain of languages. Their male population +has lately risen to 100,000, while in 1795 it amounted +only to 50,066. The Russians became first acquainted +with them in 1620. They call themselves Sakha, and +are mostly heathen, though Christianity is gaining +ground among them. According to their traditions, +their ancestors lived for a long time in company with +Mongolic tribes, and traces of this can still be discovered +in their language. Attacked by their neighbors, +they built rafts and floated down the river Lena, where +they settled in the neighborhood of what is now Yakutzk. +Their original seats seem to have been north-west +of Lake Baikal. Their language has preserved +the Turkic type more completely than any other Turco-Tataric +<pb n='305'/><anchor id='Pg305'/> +dialect. Separated from the common stock at +an early time, and removed from the disturbing influences +to which the other dialects were exposed, whether +in war or in peace, the Yakutian has preserved so many +primitive features of Tataric grammar, that even now +it may be used as a key to the grammatical forms of +the Osmanli and other more cultivated Turkic dialects. +</p> + +<p> +Southern Siberia is the mother country of the Kirgis, +one of the most numerous tribes of Turco-Tataric +origin. The Kirgis lived originally between the Ob +and Yenisei, where Mongolic tribes settled among them. +At the beginning of the seventeenth century the Russians +became acquainted with the Eastern Kirgis, then +living along the Yenisei. In 1606 they had become +tributary to Russia, and after several wars with two +neighboring tribes, they were driven more and more +south-westward, till they left Siberia altogether at the +beginning of the eighteenth century. They now live +at Burut, in Chinese Turkestan, together with the Kirgis +of the <q>Great Horde,</q> near the town of Kashgar, +north as far as the Irtish. +</p> + +<p> +Another tribe is that of the Western Kirgis, or +Kirgis-Kasak, who are partly independent, partly tributary +to Russia and China. +</p> + +<p> +Of what are called the three Kirgis Hordes, from +the Caspian Sea east as far as Lake Tenghiz, the +Small Horde is fixed in the west, between the rivers +Yemba and Ural; the Great Horde in the east; while +the most powerful occupies the centre between the +Sarasu and Yemba, and is called the Middle Horde. +Since 1819, the Great Horde has been subject to Russia. +Other Kirgis tribes, though nominally subject to +Russia, are really her most dangerous enemies. +</p> + +<pb n='306'/><anchor id='Pg306'/> + +<p> +The Turks of Asia Minor and Syria came from +Khorasan and Eastern Persia, and are Turkmans, or +remnants of the Seljuks, the rulers of Persia during +the Middle Ages. The Osmanli, whom we are accustomed +to call Turks <emph>par excellence</emph>, and who form +the ruling portion of the Turkish empire, must be traced +to the same source. They are now scattered over the +whole Turkish empire in Europe, Asia, and Africa, +and their number amounts to between 11,000,000 +and 12,000,000. They form the landed gentry, the +aristocracy, and bureaucracy of Turkey; and their +language, the Osmanli, is spoken by persons of rank +and education, and by all government authorities in +Syria, in Egypt, at Tunis, and at Tripoli. In the +southern provinces of Asiatic Russia, along the borders +of the Caspian, and through the whole of Turkestan, +it is the language of the people. It is heard even at +the court of Teheran, and is understood by official personages +in Persia. +</p> + +<p> +The rise of this powerful tribe of Osman, and the +spreading of that Turkish dialect which is now emphatically +called the Turkish, are matters of historical +notoriety. We need not search for evidence in Chinese +annals, or try to discover analogies between names that +a Greek or an Arabic writer may by chance have heard +and handed down to us, and which some of these tribes +have preserved to the present day. The ancestors of +the Osman Turks are men as well known to European +historians as Charlemagne or Alfred. It was in the +year 1224 that Soliman-shah and his tribe, pressed by +Mongolians, left Khorasan and pushed westward into +Syria, Armenia, and Asia Minor. Soliman's son, Ertoghrul, +took service under Aladdin, the Seljuk Sultan +<pb n='307'/><anchor id='Pg307'/> +of Iconium (Nicæa), and after several successful campaigns +against Greeks and Mongolians, received part +of Phrygia as his own, and there founded what was +afterwards to become the basis of the Osmanic empire. +During the last years of the thirteenth century the +Sultans of Iconium lost their power, and their former +vassals became independent sovereigns. Osman, after +taking his share of the spoil in Asia, advanced through +the Olympic passes into Bithynia and was successful +against the armies of the Emperors of Byzantium. +Osman became henceforth the national name of his +people. His son, Orkhan, whose capital was Prusa +(Bursa), after conquering Nicomedia (1327) and Nicæa +(1330), threatened the Hellespont. He took the +title of Padishah, and his court was called the <q>High +Porte.</q> His son, Soliman, crossed the Hellespont +(1357), and took possession of Gallipoli and Sestos. +He thus became master of the Dardanelles. Murad I. +took Adrianople (1362), made it his capital, conquered +Macedonia, and, after a severe struggle, overthrew the +united forces of the Slavonic races south of the Danube, +the Bulgarians, Servians, and Kroatians, in the battle +of Kossova-polye (1389). He fell himself, but his successor +Bayazeth, followed his course, took Thessaly, +passed Thermopylæ, and devastated the Peloponnesus. +The Emperor of Germany, Sigismund, who advanced +at the head of an army composed of French, German, +and Slavonic soldiers, was defeated by Bayazeth on the +Danube in the battle of Nicopolis, 1399. Bayazeth +took Bosnia, and would have taken Constantinople, had +not the same Mongolians, who in 1244 drove the first +Turkish tribes westward into Persia, threatened again +their newly acquired possessions. Timur had grasped +the reins fallen from the hands of Chingis-khán: Bayazeth +<pb n='308'/><anchor id='Pg308'/> +was compelled to meet him, and suffered defeat +(1402) in the battle of Angora (Ankyra) in Galatia. +</p> + +<p> +Europe now had respite, but not long; Timur died, +and with him his empire fell to pieces, while the Osmanic +army rallied again under Mahomet I. (1413), +and re-attained its former power under Murad II. +(1421). Successful in Asia, Murad sent his armies +back to the Danube, and after long-continued campaigns, +and powerful resistance from the Hungarians +and Slaves under Hunyad, he at last gained two decisive +victories; Varna in 1444, and Kossova in 1448. +Constantinople could no longer be held, and the Pope +endeavored in vain to rouse the chivalry of Western +Europe to a crusade against the Turks. Mahomet II. +succeeded in 1451, and on the 26th of May, 1453, Constantinople, +after a valiant resistance, fell, and became +the capital of the Turkish empire. +</p> + +<p> +It is a real pleasure to read a Turkish grammar, +even though one may have no wish to acquire it practically. +The ingenious manner in which the numerous +grammatical forms are brought out, the regularity which +pervades the system of declension and conjugation, the +transparency and intelligibility of the whole structure, +must strike all who have a sense of that wonderful +power of the human mind which has displayed itself in +language. Given so small a number of graphic and demonstrative +roots as would hardly suffice to express +the commonest wants of human beings, to produce +an instrument that shall render the faintest shades +of feeling and thought;—given a vague infinitive or +a stern imperative, to derive from it such moods as +an optative or subjunctive, and tenses as an aorist +or paulo-post future;—given incoherent utterances, to +arrange them into a system where all is uniform and +<pb n='309'/><anchor id='Pg309'/> +regular, all combined and harmonious;—such is the +work of the human mind which we see realized in +<q>language.</q> But in most languages nothing of this +early process remains visible. They stand before us +like solid rocks, and the microscope of the philologist +alone can reveal the remains of organic life with which +they are built up. +</p> + +<p> +In the grammar of the Turkic languages, on the contrary, +we have before us a language of perfectly transparent +structure, and a grammar the inner workings of +which we can study, as if watching the building of cells +in a crystal bee-hive. An eminent orientalist remarked +<q>we might imagine Turkish to be the result of the deliberations +of some eminent society of learned men;</q> +but no such society could have devised what the mind +of man produced, left to itself in the steppes of Tatary, +and guided only by its innate laws, or by an instinctive +power as wonderful as any within the realm +of nature. +</p> + +<p> +Let us examine a few forms. <q>To love,</q> in the +most general sense of the word, or love, as a root, is in +Turkish <emph>sev</emph>. This does not yet mean <q>to love,</q> +which is <emph>sevmek</emph>, or <q>love</q> as a substantive, which is +<emph>sevgu</emph> or <emph>sevi</emph>; but it only expresses the general idea of +loving in the abstract. This root, as we remarked before, +can never be touched. Whatever syllables may +be added for the modification of its meaning, the root +itself must stand out in full prominence like a pearl set +in diamonds. It must never be changed or broken, +assimilated or modified, as in the English I fall, I fell, +I take, I took, I think, I thought, and similar forms. +With this one restriction, however, we are free to treat +it at pleasure. +</p> + +<pb n='310'/><anchor id='Pg310'/> + +<p> +Let us suppose we possessed nothing like our conjugation, +but had to express such ideas as I love, thou +lovest, and the rest, for the first time. Nothing would +seem more natural now than to form an adjective or a +participle, meaning <q>loving,</q> and then add the different +pronouns, as I loving, thou loving, &c. Exactly +this the Turks have done. We need not inquire at +present how they produced what we call a participle. +It was a task, however, by no means so facile as we +now conceive it. In Turkish, one participle is formed +by <emph>er</emph>. <emph>Sev</emph>+<emph>er</emph> would, therefore, mean lov+er or +lov+ing. Thou, in Turkish, is <emph>sen</emph>, and as all modificatory +syllables are placed at the end of the root, we +get <emph>sev-er-sen</emph>, thou lovest. You in Turkish is <emph>siz</emph>; +hence <emph>sev-er-siz</emph>, you love. In these cases the pronouns +and the terminations of the verb coincide exactly. In +other persons the coincidences are less complete, because +the pronominal terminations have sometimes been +modified, or, as in the third person singular, <emph>sever</emph>, +dropped altogether as unnecessary. A reference to +other cognate languages, however, where either the +terminations or the pronouns themselves have maintained +a more primitive form, enables us to say that in +the original Turkish verb, all persons of the present +were formed by means of pronouns appended to this +participle <emph>sever</emph>. Instead of <q>I love, thou lovest, he +loves,</q> the Turkish grammarian says, <q>lover-I, lover-thou, +lover.</q> +</p> + +<p> +But these personal terminations are not the same in +the imperfect as in the present. +</p> + +<table rend="latexcolumns: 'p{3cm} p{3cm}'; tblcolumns: 'lw(25) lw(25)'"> +<row><cell>PRESENT.</cell><cell>IMPERFECT.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Sever-im, I love,</cell><cell>sever-di-m, I loved.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Sever-sen,</cell><cell>sever-di-ñ.</cell></row> +<pb n='311'/><anchor id='Pg311'/> +<row><cell>Sever,</cell><cell>sever-di.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Sever-iz,</cell><cell>sever-di-k (miz).</cell></row> +<row><cell>Sever-siz,</cell><cell>sever-di-ñiz.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Sever-ler,</cell><cell>sever-di-ler.</cell></row> +</table> + +<p> +We need not inquire as yet into the origin of the <emph>di</emph>, +added to form the imperfect; but it should be stated +that in the first person plural of the imperfect a various +reading occurs in other Tataric dialects, and that <emph>miz</emph> +is used there instead of <emph>k</emph>. Now, looking at these terminations +<emph>m</emph>, <emph>ñ</emph>, <emph>i</emph>, <emph>miz</emph>, +<emph>ñiz</emph>, and <emph>ler</emph>, we find that they +are exactly the same as the possessive pronouns used +after nouns. As the Italian says <emph>fratelmo</emph>, my brother, +and as in Hebrew we say, <emph>El-i</emph>, God (of) I, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> my +God, the Tataric languages form the phrases <q>my +house, thy house, his house,</q> by possessive pronouns +appended to substantives. A Turk says,— +</p> + +<table rend="latexcolumns: 'p{2cm} p{2cm} p{2cm} p{2cm}'; + tblcolumns: 'lw(12) lw(12) lw(12) lw(12)'"> +<row><cell>Bâbâ,</cell><cell>father,</cell><cell>bâbâ-m,</cell> + <cell>my father.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Aghâ,</cell><cell>lord,</cell><cell>aghâ-ñ,</cell><cell>thy lord.</cell></row> +<row><cell>El,</cell><cell>hand,</cell><cell>el-i,</cell><cell>his hand.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Oghlu,</cell><cell>son,</cell><cell>oghlu-muz,</cell> + <cell>our son.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Anâ,</cell><cell>mother,</cell><cell>anâ-ñiz,</cell> + <cell>your mother.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Kitâb,</cell><cell>book,</cell><cell>kitâb-leri,</cell> + <cell>their book.</cell></row> +</table> + +<p> +We may hence infer that in the imperfect these pronominal +terminations were originally taken in a possessive +sense, and that, therefore, what remains after +the personal terminations are removed, <emph>sever-di</emph>, was +never an adjective or a participle, but must have been +originally a substantive capable of receiving terminal +possessive pronouns; that is, the idea originally expressed +by the imperfect could not have been <q>loving-I,</q> +but <q>love of me.</q> +</p> + +<p> +How then, could this convey the idea of a past tense +as contrasted with the present? Let us look to our +<pb n='312'/><anchor id='Pg312'/> +own language. If desirous to express the perfect, we +say, I have loved, <emph>j'ai aimé</emph>. This <q>I have,</q> meant +originally, I possess, and in Latin <q>amicus quem amatum +habeo,</q> signified in fact a friend whom I hold dear,—not +as yet, whom I <emph>have</emph> loved. In the course of +time, however, these phrases, <q>I have said, I have +loved,</q> took the sense of the perfect, and of time past—and +not unnaturally, inasmuch as what I <emph>hold</emph>, or +<emph>have</emph> done, <emph>is</emph> done;—done, as we say, and past. In +place of an auxiliary possessive verb, the Turkish language +uses an auxiliary possessive pronoun to the same +effect. <q>Paying belonging to me,</q> equals <q>I have +paid;</q> in either case a phrase originally possessive, +took a temporal signification, and became a past or +perfect tense. This, however, is the very anatomy of +grammar, and when a Turk says <q>severdim</q> he is, +of course, as unconscious of its literal force, <q>loving +belonging to me,</q> as of the circulation of his blood. +</p> + +<p> +The most ingenious part of Turkish is undoubtedly +the verb. Like Greek and Sanskrit, it exhibits a variety +of moods and tenses, sufficient to express the nicest +shades of doubt, of surmise, of hope, and supposition. +In all these forms the root remains intact, and sounds +like a key-note through all the various modulations +produced by the changes of person, number, mood, and +time. But there is one feature so peculiar to the Turkish +verb, that no analogy can be found in any of the +Aryan languages—the power of producing new verbal +bases by the mere addition of certain letters, which give +to every verb a negative, or causative, or reflexive, or +reciprocal meaning. +</p> + +<p> +<emph>Sev-mek</emph>, for instance, as a simple root, means to love. +By adding <emph>in</emph>, we obtain a reflexive verb, <emph>sev-in-mek</emph>, +<pb n='313'/><anchor id='Pg313'/> +which means to love oneself, or rather, to rejoice, to +be happy. This may now be conjugated through all +moods and tenses, <emph>sevin</emph> being in every respect equal +to a new root. By adding <emph>ish</emph> we form a reciprocal +verb, <emph>sev-ish-mek</emph>, to love one another. +</p> + +<p> +To each of these three forms a causative sense +may be imparted by the addition of the syllable <emph>dir</emph>. +Thus, +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>i.</hi> <emph>sev-mek</emph>, to love, becomes +<hi rend='smallcaps'>iv.</hi> <emph>sev-dir-mek</emph>, to cause to love. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>ii.</hi> <emph>sev-in-mek</emph>, to rejoice, becomes +<hi rend='smallcaps'>v.</hi> <emph>sev-in-dir-mek</emph>, to cause to +rejoice. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>iii.</hi> <emph>sev-ish-mek</emph>, to love one another, becomes +<hi rend='smallcaps'>vi.</hi> <emph>sev-ish-dir-mek</emph>, +to cause one to love one another. +</p> +</quote> + +<p> +Each of these six forms may again be turned into a +passive by the addition of <emph>il</emph>. Thus, +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>i.</hi> <emph>sev-mek</emph>, to love, becomes +<hi rend='smallcaps'>vii.</hi> <emph>sev-il-mek</emph>, to be loved. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>ii.</hi> <emph>sev-in-mek</emph>, to rejoice, becomes +<hi rend='smallcaps'>viii.</hi> <emph>sev-in-il-mek</emph>, to be rejoiced +at. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>iii.</hi> <emph>sev-ish-mek</emph>, to love one another, becomes +<hi rend='smallcaps'>ix.</hi> <emph>sev-ish-il-mek</emph>, +not translatable. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>iv.</hi> <emph>sev-dir-mek</emph>, to cause one to love, becomes +<hi rend='smallcaps'>x.</hi> <emph>sev-dir-il-mek</emph>, +to be brought to love. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>v.</hi> <emph>sev-in-dir-mek</emph>, to cause to rejoice, becomes +<hi rend='smallcaps'>xi.</hi> <emph>sev-in-dir-il-mek</emph>, +to be made to rejoice. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>vi.</hi> <emph>sev-ish-dir-mek</emph>, to cause them to love +one another, becomes +<hi rend='smallcaps'>xii.</hi> <emph>sev-ish-dir-il-mek</emph>, to +be brought to love one another. +</p> +</quote> + +<p> +This, however, is by no means the whole verbal +contingent at the command of a Turkish grammarian. +Every one of these twelve secondary or tertiary roots +may again be turned into a negative by the mere addition +of <emph>me</emph>. Thus, <emph>sev-mek</emph>, to love, becomes <emph>sev-me-mek</emph>, +not to love. And if it is necessary to express the +impossibility of loving, the Turk has a new root at +<pb n='314'/><anchor id='Pg314'/> +hand to convey even that idea. Thus while <emph>sev-me-mek</emph> +denies only the fact of loving, <emph>sev-eme-mek</emph>, denies +its possibility, and means not to be able to love. By +the addition of these two modificatory syllables, the +numbers of derivative roots is at once raised to thirty-six. +Thus, +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>i.</hi> <emph>sev-mek</emph>, to love, becomes +<hi rend='smallcaps'>xiii.</hi> <emph>sev-me-mek</emph>, not to love. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>ii.</hi> <emph>sev-in-mek</emph>, to rejoice, becomes +<hi rend='smallcaps'>xiv.</hi> <emph>sev-in-me-mek</emph>, not to +rejoice. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>iii.</hi> <emph>sev-ish-mek</emph>, to love one another, becomes +<hi rend='smallcaps'>xv.</hi> <emph>sev-ish-me-mek</emph>, +not to love one another. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>iv.</hi> <emph>sev-dir-mek</emph>, to cause to love, becomes +<hi rend='smallcaps'>xvi.</hi> <emph>sev-dir-me-mek</emph>, +not to cause one to love. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>v.</hi> <emph>sev-in-dir-mek</emph>, to cause to rejoice, becomes +<hi rend='smallcaps'>xvii.</hi> <emph>sev-in-dir-me-mek</emph>, +not to cause one to rejoice. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>vi.</hi> <emph>sev-ish-dir-mek</emph>, to cause them to +love one another, becomes +<hi rend='smallcaps'>xviii.</hi> <emph>sev-ish-dir-me-mek</emph>, not to +cause them to love one +another. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>vii.</hi> <emph>sev-il-mek</emph>, to be loved, becomes +<hi rend='smallcaps'>xix.</hi> <emph>sev-il-me-mek</emph>, not to +be loved. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>viii.</hi> <emph>sev-in-il-mek</emph>, to be rejoiced at, becomes +<hi rend='smallcaps'>xx.</hi> <emph>sev-in-il-me-mek</emph>, +not to be the object of rejoicing. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>ix.</hi> <emph>sev-ish-il-mek</emph>, if it was used, would +become <hi rend='smallcaps'>xxi.</hi> <emph>sev-ish-il-me-mek</emph>; +neither form being translatable. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>x.</hi> <emph>sev-dir-il-mek</emph>, to be brought to love, becomes +<hi rend='smallcaps'>xxii.</hi> <emph>sev-dir-il-me-mek</emph>, +not to be brought to love. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>xi.</hi> <emph>sev-in-dir-il-mek</emph>, to be made +to rejoice, becomes <hi rend='smallcaps'>xxiii.</hi> <emph>sev-in-dir-il-me-mek</emph>, +not to be made to rejoice. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>xii.</hi> <emph>sev-ish-dir-il-mek</emph>, to be +brought to love one another, becomes +<hi rend='smallcaps'>xxiv.</hi> <emph>sev-ish-dir-il-me-mek</emph>, not to be brought to +love one another. +</p> +</quote> + +<p> +Some of these forms are of course of rare occurrence, +and with many verbs these derivative roots, though +possible grammatically, would be logically impossible. +Even a verb like <q>to love,</q> perhaps the most pliant +of all, resists some of the modifications to which a +<pb n='315'/><anchor id='Pg315'/> +Turkish grammarian is fain to subject it. It is clear, +however, that wherever a negation can be formed, the +idea of impossibility also can be superadded, so that by +substituting <emph>eme</emph> for <emph>me</emph>, we should raise the number of +derivative roots to thirty-six. The very last of these, +<hi rend='smallcaps'>xxxvi.</hi> <emph>sev-ish-dir-il-eme-mek</emph> would +be perfectly intelligible, +and might be used, for instance, if, in speaking +of the Sultan and the Czar, we wished to say, that it +was impossible that they should be brought to love one +another. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Finnic Class.</hi> +</p> + +<p> +It is generally supposed that the original seat of the +Finnic tribes was in the Ural mountains, and their +languages have been therefore called <emph>Uralic</emph>. From +this centre they spread east and west; and southward +in ancient times, even to the Black Sea, where Finnic +tribes, together with Mongolic and Turkic, were probably +known to the Greeks under the comprehensive +and convenient name of Scythians. As we possess no +literary documents of any of these nomadic nations, it +is impossible to say, even where Greek writers have +preserved their barbarous names, to what branch of +the vast Turanian family they belonged. Their habits +were probably identical before the Christian era, during +the Middle Ages, and at the present day. One tribe +takes possession of a tract and retains it perhaps for +several generations, and gives its name to the meadows +where it tends its flocks, and to the rivers where the +horses are watered. If the country be fertile, it will +attract the eye of other tribes; wars begin, and if resistance +be hopeless, hundreds of families fly from their +paternal pastures, to migrate perhaps for generations,—for +<pb n='316'/><anchor id='Pg316'/> +migration they find a more natural life than permanent +habitation,—and after a time we may rediscover +their names a thousand miles distant. Or two +tribes will carry on their warfare for ages, till with +reduced numbers both have perhaps to make common +cause against some new enemy. +</p> + +<p> +During these continued struggles their languages +lose as many words as men are killed on the field of +battle. Some words (we might say) go over, others +are made prisoners, and exchanged again during times +of peace. Besides, there are parleys and challenges, +and at last a dialect is produced which may very properly +be called a language of the camp, (Urdu-zebán, +camp-language, is the proper name of Hindustání, +formed in the armies of the Mogul emperors,) but +where it is difficult for the philologist to arrange the +living and to number the slain, unless some salient +points of grammar have been preserved throughout the +medley. We saw how a number of tribes may be at +times suddenly gathered by the command of a Chingis-khán +or Timur, like billows heaving and swelling at +the call of a thunder-storm. One such wave rolling +on from Karakorum to Liegnitz may sweep away all the +sheepfolds and landmarks of centuries, and when the +storm is over, a thin crust will, as after a flood, remain, +concealing the underlying stratum of people and languages. +</p> + +<p> +On the evidence of language, the Finnic stock is +divided into four branches, +</p> + +<lg> +<l>The Chudic,</l> +<l>The Bulgaric,</l> +<l>The Permic,</l> +<l>The Ugric.</l> +</lg> + +<pb n='317'/><anchor id='Pg317'/> + +<p> +The Chudic branch comprises the Finnic of the Baltic +coasts. The name is derived from Chud (Tchud) +originally applied by the Russians to the Finnic nations +in the north-west of Russia. Afterwards it took +a more general sense, and was used almost synonymously +with Scythian for all the tribes of Central and +Northern Asia. The Finns, properly so called, or as +they call themselves Suomalainen, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> inhabitants of +fens, are settled in the provinces of Finland (formerly +belonging to Sweden, but since 1809 annexed to Russia), +and in parts of the governments of Archangel and +Olonetz. Their number is stated at 1,521,515. The +Finns are the most advanced of their whole family, +and are, the Magyars excepted, the only Finnic race +that can claim a station among the civilized and civilizing +nations of the world. Their literature and, above +all, their popular poetry bear witness to a high intellectual +development in times which we may call mythical, +and in places more favorable to the glow of poetical +feelings than their present abode, the last refuge +Europe could afford them. The epic songs still live +among the poorest, recorded by oral tradition alone, +and preserving all the features of a perfect metre and +of a more ancient language. A national feeling has +lately arisen amongst the Finns, despite of Russian supremacy, +and the labors of Sjögern, Lönnrot, Castrén, +and Kellgren, receiving hence a powerful impulse, have +produced results truly surprising. From the mouths +of the aged an epic poem has been collected equalling +the Iliad in length and completeness, nay, if we can +forget for a moment all that <emph>we</emph> in our youth learned +to call beautiful, not less beautiful. A Finn is not a +Greek, and Wainamoinen was not a Homer. But if +<pb n='318'/><anchor id='Pg318'/> +the poet may take his colors from that nature by which +he is surrounded, if he may depict the men with whom +he lives, <q>Kalewala</q> possesses merits not dissimilar from +those of the Iliad, and will claim its place as the fifth +national epic of the world, side by side with the Ionian +songs, with the Mahábhárata, the Shahnámeh, and the +Nibelunge. This early literary cultivation has not +been without a powerful influence on the language. +It has imparted permanency to its forms and a traditional +character to its words, so that at first sight we +might almost doubt whether the grammar of this language +had not left the agglutinative stage, and entered +into the current of inflection with Greek or Sanskrit. +The agglutinative type, however, yet remains, and its +grammar shows a luxuriance of grammatical combination +second only to Turkish and Hungarian. Like +Turkish it observes the <q>harmony of vowels,</q> a feature +peculiar to Turanian languages, as explained +before. +</p> + +<p> +Karelian and Tavastian are dialectical varieties of +Finnish. +</p> + +<p> +The Esths or Esthonians, neighbors to the Finns, +speak a language closely allied to the Finnish. It is +divided into the dialects of Dorpat (in Livonia) and +Reval. Except some popular songs it is almost without +literature. Esthonia, together with Livonia and +Kurland, forms the three Baltic provinces of Russia. +The population on the islands of the Gulf of Finland +is mostly Esthonian. In the higher ranks of society +Esthonian is hardly understood, and never spoken. +</p> + +<p> +Besides the Finns and Esthonians, the Livonians +and the Lapps must be reckoned also amongst the +same family. Their number, however, is small. The +<pb n='319'/><anchor id='Pg319'/> +population of Livonia consists chiefly of Esths, Letts, +Russians, and Germans. The number of Livonians +speaking their own dialect is not more than 5000. +</p> + +<p> +The Lapps, or Laplanders, inhabit the most northern +part of Europe. They belong to Sweden and +Russia. Their number is estimated at 28,000. Their +language has lately attracted much attention, and Castrén's +travels give a description of their manners most +interesting from its simplicity and faithfulness. +</p> + +<p> +The Bulgaria branch comprises the Tcheremissians +and Mordvinians, scattered in disconnected colonies +along the Volga, and surrounded by Russian and Tataric +dialects. Both languages are extremely artificial +in their grammar, and allow an accumulation of pronominal +affixes at the end of verbs, surpassed only by +the Bask, the Caucasian, and those American dialects +that have been called Polysynthetic. +</p> + +<p> +The general name given to these tribes, Bulgaric, +is not borrowed from Bulgaria, on the Danube; Bulgaria, +on the contrary, received its name (replacing +Moesia) from the Finnic armies by whom it was conquered +in the seventh century. Bulgarian tribes advanced +from the Volga to the Don, and after remaining +for a time under the sovereignty of the Avars on +the Don and Dnieper, they advanced to the Danube in +635, and founded the Bulgarian kingdom. This has +retained its name to the present day, though the Finnic +Bulgarians have long been absorbed by Slavonic inhabitants, +and both brought under Turkish sway since +1392. +</p> + +<p> +The third, or Permic branch, comprises the idioms +of the Votiakes, the Sirianes, and the Permians, +three dialects of one language. <emph>Perm</emph> was the ancient +<pb n='320'/><anchor id='Pg320'/> +name for the country between 61°-76° <hi rend='smallcaps'>e.</hi> lon. and +55°-65° <hi rend='smallcaps'>n.</hi> lat. The Permic tribes were driven westward +by their eastern neighbors, the Voguls, and thus +pressed upon their western neighbors, the Bulgars +of the Volga. The Votiakes are found between the +rivers Vyatka and Kama. Northwards follow the +Sirianes, inhabiting the country on the Upper Kâma, +while the eastern portion is held by the Permians. +These are surrounded on the south by the Tatars of +Orenburg and the Bashkirs; on the north by the +Samoyedes, and on the east by Voguls, who pressed +on them from the Ural. +</p> + +<p> +These Voguls, together with Hungarians and Ostiakes, +form the fourth and last branch of the Finnic +family, the Ugric. It was in 462, after the dismemberment +of Attila's Hunnic empire that these Ugric +tribes approached Europe. They were then called +Onagurs, Saragurs, and Urogs; and in later times +they occur in Russian chronicles as Ugry. They are +the ancestors of the Hungarians, and should not be +confounded with the Uigurs, an ancient Turkic tribe +mentioned before. +</p> + +<p> +The similarity between the Hungarian language and +dialects of Finnic origin, spoken east of the Volga, is +not a new discovery. In 1253, Wilhelm Ruysbroeck, +a priest who travelled beyond the Volga, remarked +that a race called Pascatir, who live on the Yaïk, +spoke the same language as the Hungarians. They +were then settled east of the old Bulgarian kingdom, +the capital of which, the ancient Bolgari, on the left +of the Volga, may still be traced in the ruins of Spask. +If these Pascatir—the portion of the Ugric tribes that +remained east of the Volga—are identical with the +<pb n='321'/><anchor id='Pg321'/> +Bashkir, as Klaproth supposes, it would follow that, +in later times, they gave up their language, for the +present Bashkir no longer speak a Hungarian, but a +Turkic, dialect. The affinity of the Hungarian and +the Ugro-Finnic dialects was first proved philologically +by Gyarmathi in 1799. +</p> + +<p> +A few instances may suffice to show this connection:— +</p> + +<table rend="latexcolumns: 'p{2cm} p{2cm} p{2cm}'; + tblcolumns: 'lw(15) lw(15) lw(15)'"> +<row><cell>Hungarian.</cell><cell>Tcheremissian.</cell><cell>English.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Atya-m</cell><cell> atya-m</cell><cell> my father.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Atya-d</cell><cell> atya-t</cell><cell> thy father.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Atya</cell><cell>atya-se</cell><cell> his father.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Atya-nk</cell><cell>atya-ne</cell><cell> our father.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Atya-tok</cell><cell> atya-da</cell><cell> your father.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Aty-ok</cell><cell> atya-st</cell><cell> their father.</cell></row> +</table> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>Declension.</hi> +</p> + +<table rend="latexcolumns: 'p{1cm} p{2cm} p{2cm} p{2cm}'; + tblcolumns: 'lw(10) lw(15) lw(15) lw(15)'"> +<row><cell></cell><cell>Hungarian.</cell><cell>Esthonian.</cell> + <cell>English.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Nom.</cell><cell>vér</cell><cell>werri</cell><cell>blood.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Gen.</cell><cell>véré</cell><cell>werre</cell><cell>of blood.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Dat</cell><cell>vérnek</cell><cell>werrele</cell><cell>to blood.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Acc.</cell><cell>vért</cell><cell>werd</cell><cell> blood.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Abl.</cell><cell>vérestöl</cell><cell>werrist</cell> + <cell> from blood.</cell></row> +</table> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>Conjugation.</hi> +</p> + +<table rend="latexcolumns: 'p{2cm} p{2cm} p{2cm}'; + tblcolumns: 'lw(15) lw(15) lw(15)'"> +<row><cell>Hungarian.</cell><cell>Esthonian.</cell><cell>English.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Lelem</cell><cell> leian</cell><cell>I find.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Leled</cell><cell> leiad</cell><cell>thou findest.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Leli</cell><cell>leiab</cell><cell>he finds.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Leljük</cell><cell> leiame</cell><cell> we find.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Lelitek</cell><cell>leiate</cell><cell> you find.</cell></row> +<row><cell>Lelik</cell><cell> leiawad</cell><cell> they find.</cell></row> +</table> + +<pb n='322'/><anchor id='Pg322'/> + +<p> +A +Comparative Table +of the +<hi rend='smallcaps'>Numerals</hi> of each of the Four Branches of the +<hi rend='smallcaps'>Finnic Class</hi>, +showing the degree of their relationship. +</p> + +<table rend="latexcolumns: 'p{2cm} p{1cm} p{1cm} p{1cm} p{1cm}'; + tblcolumns: 'lw(25) lw(8) lw(8) lw(8) lw(8)'"> +<row><cell></cell><cell>1</cell><cell>2</cell><cell>3</cell><cell>4</cell></row> +<row><cell>Chudic, Finnish</cell><cell>yksi</cell><cell>kaksi</cell><cell>kolme</cell> + <cell>neljä</cell></row> +<row><cell>Chudic, Esthonian</cell><cell>iits</cell><cell>kats</cell><cell>kolm</cell> + <cell>nelli</cell></row> +<row><cell>Bulgaric, Tcheremissian</cell><cell>ik</cell><cell>kok</cell><cell>kum</cell> + <cell>nil</cell></row> +<row><cell>Bulgaric, Mordvinian</cell><cell>vaike</cell><cell>kavto</cell> + <cell>kolmo</cell><cell>nile</cell></row> +<row><cell>Permic, Sirianian</cell><cell>ötik</cell><cell>kyk</cell><cell>kujim</cell> + <cell>ujoli</cell></row> +<row><cell>Ugric, Ostiakian</cell><cell>it</cell><cell>kat</cell><cell>chudem</cell> + <cell>njeda</cell></row> +<row><cell>Ugric, Hungarian</cell><cell>egy</cell><cell>ket</cell><cell>harom</cell> + <cell>negy</cell></row> +</table> + +<table rend="latexcolumns: 'p{2cm} p{1cm} p{1cm} p{1cm}'; + tblcolumns: 'lw(25) lw(8) lw(8) lw(8)'"> +<row><cell></cell><cell>5</cell><cell>6</cell><cell>7</cell></row> +<row><cell>Chudic, Finnish</cell><cell>viisi</cell><cell>kuusi</cell> + <cell>seitsemän</cell></row> +<row><cell>Chudic, Esthonian</cell><cell>wiis</cell><cell>kuas</cell> + <cell>seitse</cell></row> +<row><cell>Bulgaric, Tcheremissian</cell><cell>vis</cell><cell>kut</cell> + <cell>sim</cell></row> +<row><cell>Bulgaric, Mordvinian</cell><cell>väte</cell><cell>kóto</cell> + <cell>sisem</cell></row> +<row><cell>Permic, Sirianian</cell><cell>vit</cell><cell>kvait</cell> + <cell>sizim</cell></row> +<row><cell>Ugric, Ostiakian</cell><cell>vet</cell><cell>chut</cell><cell>tabet</cell> + </row> +<row><cell>Ugric, Hungarian</cell><cell>öt</cell><cell>hat</cell><cell>het</cell></row> +</table> + +<table rend="latexcolumns: 'p{2cm} p{1.5cm} p{1.5cm} p{1.5cm}'; + tblcolumns: 'lw(25) lw(8) lw(8) lw(8)'"> +<row><cell></cell><cell>8</cell><cell>9</cell> + <cell>10</cell></row> +<row><cell>Chudic, Finnish</cell> + <cell>kahdeksan</cell><cell>yhdeksan</cell><cell>kymmenen</cell></row> +<row><cell>Chudic, Esthonian</cell> + <cell>kattesa</cell><cell>üttesa</cell><cell>kümme</cell></row> +<row><cell>Bulgaric, Tcheremissian</cell> + <cell>kändäxe</cell><cell>endexe</cell><cell>lu</cell></row> +<row><cell>Bulgaric, Mordvinian</cell> + <cell>kavsko</cell><cell>väikse</cell><cell>kämen</cell></row> +<row><cell>Permic, Sirianian</cell> + <cell>kökjâmys</cell><cell>ökmys</cell><cell>das</cell></row> +<row><cell>Ugric, Ostiakian</cell><cell>nida</cell> + <cell>arjong</cell><cell>jong</cell></row> +<row><cell>Ugric, Hungarian</cell><cell>njolcz</cell> + <cell>kilencz</cell><cell>tiz</cell></row> +</table> + +<pb n='323'/><anchor id='Pg323'/> + +<p> +We have thus examined the four chief classes of the +Turanian family, the Tungusic, Mongolic, Turkic, and +Finnic. The Tungusic branch stands lowest; its grammar +is not much richer than Chinese, and in its structure +there is an absence of that architectonic order +which in Chinese makes the Cyclopean stones of language +hold together without cement. This applies, +however, principally to the Mandshu; other Tungusic +dialects spoken, not in China, but in the original seats +of the Mandshus, are even now beginning to develop +grammatical forms. +</p> + +<p> +The Mongolic dialects excel the Tungusic, but in +their grammar can hardly distinguish between the +different parts of speech. The spoken idioms of the +Mongolians, as of the Tungusians, are evidently struggling +towards a more organic life, and Castrén has +brought home evidence of incipient verbal growth in +the language of the Buriäts and a Tungusic dialect +spoken near Nyertchinsk. +</p> + +<p> +This is, however, only a small beginning, if compared +with the profusion of grammatical resources displayed +by the Turkic languages. In their system of +conjugation, the Turkic dialects can hardly be surpassed. +Their verbs are like branches which break +down under the heavy burden of fruits and blossoms. +The excellence of the Finnic languages consists rather +in a diminution than increase of verbal forms; but in +declension Finnish is even richer than Turkish. +</p> + +<p> +These four classes, together with the Samoyedic, +constitute the northern or Ural-Altaic division of the +Turanian family. +</p> + +<p> +The southern division consists of the Tamulic, the +Gangetic (Trans-Himalayan and Sub-Himalayan), the +<pb n='324'/><anchor id='Pg324'/> +Lohitic, the Taïc, and the Malaïc classes.<note place='foot'>Of +these I can only give a tabular survey at the end of these Lectures, +referring for further particulars to my <q>Letter on the Turanian Languages.</q> +The Gangetic and Lohitic dialects are those comprehended under the name +of Bhotîya.</note> These two +divisions comprehend very nearly all the languages of +Asia, with the exception of Chinese, which, together +with its neighboring dialects, forms the only representative +of radical or monosyllabic speech. A few, such +as Japanese,<note place='foot'>Professor Boller of Vienna, who +has given a most accurate analysis of +the Turanian languages in the <q>Transactions of the Vienna Academy,</q> +has lately established the Turanian character of Japanese.</note> +the language of Korea, of the Koriakes, +the Kamchadales, and the numerous dialects of the +Caucasus, &c., remain unclassed; but in them also +some traces of a common origin with the Turanian +languages have, it is probable, survived, and await the +discovery of philological research. +</p> + +<p> +Of the third, or inflectional, stage, I need not say +much, as we have examined its structure when analyzing +in our former Lectures a number of words in Sanskrit, +Greek, Latin, or any other of the Aryan languages. +The chief distinction between an inflectional +and an agglutinative language consists in the fact that +agglutinative languages preserve the consciousness of +their roots, and therefore do not allow them to be affected +by phonetic corruption; and, though they have +lost the consciousness of the original meaning of their +terminations, they feel distinctly the difference between +the significative root, and the modifying elements. +Not so in the inflectional languages. There +the various elements which enter into the composition +of words, may become so welded together, and suffer +so much from phonetic corruption, that none but the +<pb n='325'/><anchor id='Pg325'/> +educated would be aware of an original distinction +between root and termination, and none but the comparative +grammarian able to discover the seams that +separate the component parts. +</p> + +<p> +If you consider the character of our morphological +classification, you will see that this classification, differing +thereby from the genealogical, must be applicable +to all languages. Our classification exhausts all possibilities. +If the component elements of language are +roots, predicative and demonstrative, we cannot have +more than three combinations. Roots may either remain +roots without any modification; or secondly, they +may be joined so that one determines the other and +loses its independent existence; or thirdly, they may +be joined and be allowed to coalesce, so that both lose +their independent existence. The number of roots +which enter into the composition of a word makes no +difference, and it is unnecessary, therefore, to admit a +fourth class, sometimes called <emph>polysynthetic</emph>, or <emph>incorporating</emph>, +including most of the American languages. As +long as in these sesquipedalian compounds, the significative +root remains distinct, they belong to the agglutinative +stage; as soon as it is absorbed by the terminations, +they belong to the inflectional stage. Nor is it necessary +to distinguish between <emph>synthetic</emph> and <emph>analytical</emph> +languages, including under the former name the ancient, +and under the latter the modern, languages of +the inflectional class. The formation of such phrases +as the French <emph>j'aimerai</emph>, for <emph>j'ai à aimer</emph>, or the English, +<emph>I shall do</emph>, <emph>thou wilt do</emph>, may be called +<emph>analytical</emph> or +<emph>metaphrastic</emph>. But in their morphological nature these +phrases are still inflectional. If we analyze such a +phrase as <emph>je vivrai</emph>, we find it was originally <emph>ego</emph> (Sanskrit +<pb n='326'/><anchor id='Pg326'/> +<emph>aham</emph>) <emph>vivere</emph> (Sanskrit <emph>jîv-as-e</emph>, +dat. neut.) <emph>habeo</emph> +(Sanskrit <emph>bhâ-vayâ-mi</emph>); that is to say, we have a +number of words in which grammatical articulation +has been almost entirely destroyed, but has not been +cast off; whereas in Turanian languages grammatical +forms are produced by the combination of integral +roots, and the old and useless terminations are first discarded +before any new combination takes place.<note place='foot'>Letter +on the Turanian Languages, p. 75.</note> +</p> + +<p> +At the end of our morphological classification a +problem presents itself, which we might have declined +to enter upon if we had confined ourselves to a genealogical +classification. At the end of our genealogical +classification we had to confess that only a certain number +of languages had as yet been arranged genealogically, +and that therefore the time for approaching the +problem of the common origin of all languages had not +yet come. Now, however, although we have not specified +all languages which belong to the radical, the terminational, +and inflectional classes, we have clearly +laid it down as a principle, that all languages must fall +under one or the other of these three categories of +human speech. It would not be consistent, therefore, +to shrink from the consideration of a problem, which, +though beset with many difficulties, cannot be excluded +from the science of language. +</p> + +<p> +Let us first see our problem clearly and distinctly. +The problem of the common origin of languages has +no necessary connection with the problem of the common +origin of mankind. If it could be proved that +languages had had different beginnings, this would in +nowise necessitate the admission of different beginnings +of the human race. For if we look upon language as +<pb n='327'/><anchor id='Pg327'/> +natural to man, it might have broken out at different +times and in different countries among the scattered +descendants of one original pair; if, on the contrary, +language is to be treated as an artificial invention, there +is still less reason why each succeeding generation should +not have invented its own idiom. +</p> + +<p> +Nor would it follow, if it could be proved that all +the dialects of mankind point to one common source, +that therefore the human race must descend from one +pair. For language might have been the property of +one favored race, and have been communicated to the +other races in the progress of history. +</p> + +<p> +The science of language and the science of ethnology +have both suffered most seriously from being +mixed up together. The classification of races and +languages should be quite independent of each other. +Races may change their languages, and history supplies +us with several instances where one race adopted +the language of another. Different languages, therefore, +may be spoken by one race, or the same language +may be spoken by different races; so that any attempt +at squaring the classification of races and tongues must +necessarily fail. +</p> + +<p> +Secondly, the problem of the common origin of languages +has no connection with the statements contained +in the Old Testament regarding the creation of man, +and the genealogies of the patriarchs. If our researches +led us to the admission of different beginnings +for the languages of mankind, there is nothing in the +Old Testament opposed to this view. For although +the Jews believed that for a time the whole earth was +of one language and of one speech, it has long been +pointed out by eminent divines, with particular reference +<pb n='328'/><anchor id='Pg328'/> +to the dialects of America, that new languages +might have arisen at later times. If, on the contrary, +we arrive at the conviction that all languages can be +traced back to one common source, we could never +think of transferring the genealogies of the Old Testament +to the genealogical classification of language. +The genealogies of the Old Testament refer to blood, +not to language, and as we know that people, without +changing their name, did frequently change their language, +it is clearly impossible that the genealogies of +the Old Testament should coincide with the genealogical +classification of languages. In order to avoid a +confusion of ideas, it would be preferable to abstain +altogether from using the same names to express relationship +of language which in the Bible are used to +express relationship of blood. It was usual formerly +to speak of <emph>Japhetic</emph>, <emph>Hamitic</emph> and <emph>Semitic</emph> +languages. The first name has now been replaced by <emph>Aryan</emph>, the +second by <emph>African</emph>; and though the third is still retained, +it has received a scientific definition quite different +from the meaning which it would have in the Bible. +It is well to bear this in mind, in order to prevent not +only those who are forever attacking the Bible with +arrows that cannot reach it, but likewise those who +defend it with weapons they know not how to wield, +from disturbing in any way the quiet progress of the +science of language. +</p> + +<p> +Let us now look dispassionately at our problem. +The problem of the possibility of a common origin of +all languages naturally divides itself into two parts, the +<emph>formal</emph> and the <emph>material</emph>. We are to-day concerned +with the formal part only. We have examined all +possible forms which language can assume, and we +<pb n='329'/><anchor id='Pg329'/> +have now to ask, can we reconcile with these three +distinct forms, the radical, the terminational, and the +inflectional, the admission of one common origin of +human speech? I answer decidedly, Yes. +</p> + +<p> +The chief argument that has been brought forward +against the common origin of language is this, that no +monosyllabic or radical language has ever entered into +an agglutinative or terminational stage, and that no +agglutinative or terminational language has ever risen +to the inflectional stage. Chinese, it is said, is still +what it has been from the beginning; it has never +produced agglutinative or inflectional forms; nor has +any Turanian language ever given up the distinctive +feature of the terminational stage, namely, the integrity +of its roots. +</p> + +<p> +In answer to this it should be pointed out that though +each language, as soon as it once becomes settled, retains +that morphological character which it had when it first +assumed its individual or national existence, it does not +lose altogether the power of producing grammatical +forms that belong to a higher stage. In Chinese, and +particularly in Chinese dialects, we find rudimentary +traces of agglutination. The <emph>li</emph> which I mentioned +before as the sign of the locative, has dwindled down +to a mere postposition, and a modern Chinese is no +more aware that <emph>li</emph> meant originally interior, than the +Turanian is of the origin of his case-terminations.<note place='foot'><p>M. +Stanislas Julien remarks that the numerous compounds which occur +in Chinese prove the wide-spread influence of the principle of agglutination +in that language. The fact is, that in Chinese every sound has numerous +meanings; and in order to avoid ambiguity, one word is frequently followed +by another which agrees with it in that particular meaning which is +intended by the speaker. Thus:— +</p> +<p> +<emph>chi-youen</emph> (beginning-origin) signifies beginning.<lb/> +<emph>ken-youen</emph> (root-origin) signifies beginning.<lb/> +<emph>youen-chi</emph>n (origin-beginning) signifies beginning.<lb/> +<emph>meï-miai</emph> (beautiful-remarkable) signifies beautiful.<lb/> +<emph>meï-li</emph> (beautiful-elegant) signifies beautiful.<lb/> +<emph>chen-youen</emph> (charming-lovely) signifies beautiful.<lb/> +<emph>yong-i</emph> (easy-facile) signifies easily.<lb/> +<emph>tsong-yong</emph> (to obey, easy) signifies easily. +</p> +<p> +In order to express <q>to boast,</q> the Chinese say <emph>king-koua</emph>, +<emph>king-fu</emph>, &c., +both words having one and the same meaning. +</p> +<p> +This peculiar system of <emph>juxta-position</emph>, however, cannot be considered as +agglutination in the strict sense of the word.</p></note> In +<pb n='330'/><anchor id='Pg330'/> +the spoken dialects of Chinese, agglutinative forms are +of more frequent occurrence. Thus, in the Shanghai +dialect, <emph>wo</emph> is to speak, as a verb; <emph>woda</emph>, a word. Of +<emph>woda</emph> a genitive is formed, <emph>woda-ka</emph>, +a dative <emph>pela woda</emph>, an accusative <emph>tang +woda</emph>.<note place='foot'>Turanian Languages, p. 24.</note> +In agglutinative languages +again, we meet with rudimentary traces of inflection. +Thus in Tamil the root <emph>tûngu</emph>, to sleep, has not retained +its full integrity in the derivative <emph>tûkkam</emph>, sleep. +</p> + +<p> +I mention these instances, which might be greatly +multiplied, in order to show that there is nothing +mysterious in the tenacity with which each language +clings in general to that stage of grammar which it +had attained at the time of its first settlement. If a +family, or a tribe, or a nation, has once accustomed +itself to express its ideas according to one system of +grammar, that first mould remains and becomes +stronger with each generation. But, while Chinese +was arrested and became traditional in this very early +stage the radical, other dialects passed on through that +stage, retaining their pliancy. They were not arrested, +and did not become traditional or national, before those +who spoke them had learnt to appreciate the advantage +of agglutination. That advantage being once perceived, +a few single forms in which agglutination first showed +itself would soon, by that sense of analogy which is inherent +<pb n='331'/><anchor id='Pg331'/> +in language, extend their influence irresistibly. +Languages arrested in that stage would cling with +equal tenacity to the system of agglutination. A Chinese +can hardly understand how language is possible, +unless every syllable is significative; a Turanian despises +every idiom in which each word does not display +distinctly its radical and significative element; whereas, +we who are accustomed to the use of inflectional languages, +are proud of the very grammar which a Chinese +and Turanian would treat with contempt. +</p> + +<p> +The fact, therefore, that languages, if once settled, +do not change their grammatical constitution, is no +argument against our theory, that every inflectional +language was once agglutinative, and every agglutinative +language was once monosyllabic. I call it a +theory, but it is more than a theory, for it is the only +possible way in which the realities of Sanskrit or any +other inflectional language can be explained. As far +as the formal part of language is concerned, we cannot +resist the conclusion that what is now <emph>inflectional</emph> was +formerly <emph>agglutinative</emph>, and what is now <emph>agglutinative</emph> +was at first <emph>radical</emph>. The great stream of language +rolled on in numberless dialects, and changed its +grammatical coloring as it passed from time to time +through new deposits of thought. The different +channels which left the main current and became +stationary and stagnant, or, if you like, literary and +traditional, retained forever that coloring which the +main current displayed at the stage of their separation. +If we call the radical stage <emph>white</emph>, the agglutinative +<emph>red</emph>, and the inflectional <emph>blue</emph>, then we may well +understand why the white channels should show hardly +a drop of red or blue, or why the red channels should +<pb n='332'/><anchor id='Pg332'/> +hardly betray a shadow of blue; and we shall be prepared +to find what we do find, namely, white tints in +the red, and white and red tints in the blue channels +of speech. +</p> + +<p> +You will have perceived that in what I have said I +only argue for the possibility, not for the necessity, of a +common origin of language. +</p> + +<p> +I look upon the problem of the common origin of +language, which I have shown to be quite independent +of the problem of the common origin of mankind, as +a question which ought to be kept open as long as possible. +It is not, I believe, a problem quite as hopeless +as that of the plurality of worlds, on which so much +has been written of late, but it should be treated very +much in the same manner. As it is impossible to demonstrate +by the evidence of the senses that the planets +are inhabited, the only way to prove that they +are, is to prove that it is impossible that they should +not be. Thus on the other hand, in order to prove +that the planets are not inhabited, you must prove +that it is impossible that they should be. As soon +as the one or the other has been proved, the question +will be set at rest: till then it must remain an +open question, whatever our own predilections on the +subject may be. +</p> + +<p> +I do not take quite as desponding a view of the +problem of the common origin of language, but I +insist on this, that we ought not to allow this problem +to be in any way prejudged. Now it has been the +tendency of the most distinguished writers on comparative +philology to take it almost for granted, that +after the discovery of the two families of language, the +Aryan and Semitic, and after the establishment of the +<pb n='333'/><anchor id='Pg333'/> +close ties of relationship which unite the members of +each, it would be impossible to admit any longer a +common origin of language. It was natural, after the +criteria by which the unity of the Aryan as well as the +Semitic dialects can be proved had been so successfully +defined, that the absence of similar coincidences between +any Semitic and Aryan language, or between +these and any other branch of speech, should have +led to a belief that no connection was admissible between +them. A Linnæan botanist, who has his definite +marks by which to recognize an Anemone, would reject +with equal confidence any connection between the species +Anemone and other flowers which have since been +classed under the same head though deficient in the +Linnæan marks of the Anemone. +</p> + +<p> +But there are surely different degrees of affinity in +languages as well as in all other productions of +nature, and the different families of speech, though +they cannot show the same signs of relationship by +which their members are held together, need not of +necessity have been perfect strangers to each other +from the beginning. +</p> + +<p> +Now I confess that when I found the argument +used over and over again, that it is impossible any +longer to speak of a common origin of language, because +comparative philology had proved that there +existed various families of language, I felt that this +was not true, that at all events it was an exaggeration. +</p> + +<p> +The problem, if properly viewed, bears the following +aspect:—<q><emph>If you wish to assert that language +had various beginnings, you must prove it impossible +that language could have had a common origin.</emph></q> +</p> + +<p> +No such impossibility has ever been established +<pb n='334'/><anchor id='Pg334'/> +with regard to a common origin of the Aryan and +Semitic dialects; while on the contrary the analysis +of the grammatical forms in either family has removed +many difficulties, and made it at least intelligible +how, with materials identical or very similar, two +individuals, or two families, or two nations, could in +the course of time have produced languages so different +in form as Hebrew and Sanskrit. +</p> + +<p> +But still greater light was thrown on the formative +and metamorphic process of language by the study of +other dialects unconnected with Sanskrit or Hebrew, +and exhibiting before our eyes the growth of those +grammatical forms (grammatical in the widest sense +of the word) which in the Aryan and Semitic families +we know only as formed, not as forming; as decaying, +not as living; as traditional, not as understood and +intentional: I mean the Turanian languages. The +traces by which these languages attest their original +relationship are much fainter than in the Semitic +and Aryan families, but they are so of necessity. +In the Aryan and Semitic families, the agglutinative +process, by which alone grammatical forms can be +obtained, has been arrested at some time, and this +could only have been through religious or political +influences. By the same power through which an +advancing civilization absorbs the manifold dialects +in which every spoken idiom naturally represents +itself, the first political or religious centralization +must necessarily have put a check on the exuberance +of an agglutinative speech. Out of many possible +forms one became popular, fixed, and technical for +each word, for each grammatical category; and by +means of poetry, law, and religion, a literary or political +<pb n='335'/><anchor id='Pg335'/> +language was produced to which thenceforth +nothing had to be added; which in a short time, +after becoming unintelligible in its formal elements, +was liable to phonetic corruption only, but incapable +of internal resuscitation. It is necessary to admit a +primitive concentration of this kind for the Aryan +and Semitic families, for it is thus only that we can +account for coincidences between Sanskrit and Greek +terminations, which were formed neither from Greek +nor from Sanskrit materials, but which are still identically +the same in both. It is in this sense that I +call these languages political or state languages, and +it has been truly said that languages belonging to +these families must be able to prove their relationship +by sharing in common not only what is regular +and intelligible, but what is anomalous, unintelligible, +and dead. +</p> + +<p> +If no such concentration takes place, languages, +though formed of the same materials and originally +identical, must necessarily diverge in what we may +call dialects, but in a very different sense from the +dialects such as we find in the later periods of political +languages. The process of agglutination will continue +in each clan, and forms becoming unintelligible will be +easily replaced by new and more intelligible compounds. +If the cases are formed by postpositions, new postpositions +can be used as soon as the old ones become obsolete. +If the conjugation is formed by pronouns, new +pronouns can be used if the old ones are no longer sufficiently +distinct. +</p> + +<p> +Let us ask then, what coincidences we are likely to +find in agglutinative dialects which have become separated, +and which gradually approach to a more settled +<pb n='336'/><anchor id='Pg336'/> +state? It seems to me that we can only expect to find +in them such coincidences as Castrén and Schott have +succeeded in discovering in the Finnic, Turkic, Mongolic, +Tungusic, and Samoyedic languages; and such as +Hodgson, Caldwell, Logan, and myself have pointed out +in the Tamulic, Gangetic, Lohitic, Taïc, and Malaïc languages. +They must refer chiefly to the radical materials +of language, or to those parts of speech which it +is most difficult to reproduce, I mean pronouns, numerals, +and prepositions. These languages will hardly +ever agree in what is anomalous or inorganic, because +their organism repels continually what begins to be formal +and unintelligible. It is astonishing rather, that +any words of a conventional meaning should have +been discovered as the common property of the Turanian +languages, than that most of their words and forms +should be peculiar to each. These coincidences must, +however, be accounted for by those who deny the common +origin of the Turanian languages; they must be +accounted for, either as the result of accident, or of an +imitative instinct which led the human mind everywhere +to the same onomatopoëtic formations. This has +never been done, and it will require great efforts to +achieve it. +</p> + +<p> +To myself the study of the Turanian family was interesting +particularly because it offered an opportunity +of learning how far languages, supposed to be of a common +origin, might diverge and become dissimilar by the +unrestrained operation of dialectic regeneration. +</p> + +<p> +In a letter which I addressed to my friend, the late +Baron Bunsen, and which was published by him in his +<q>Outlines of the Philosophy of Universal History</q><note place='foot'>These +<q>Outlines</q> form vols. iii. and iv. of Bunsen's work, +<q>Christianity and Mankind,</q> in seven vols. (London, 1854: Longman), and are +sold separately.</note> +<pb n='337'/><anchor id='Pg337'/> +(vol. i. pp. 263-521), it had been my object to trace, +as far as I was able, the principles which guided the +formation of agglutinative languages, and to show how +far languages may become dissimilar in their grammar +and dictionary, and yet allow us to treat them as cognate +dialects. In answer to the assertion that it was +impossible, I tried, in the fourth, fifth, and sixth +sections of that Essay, to show <emph>how</emph> it was possible, that, +starting from a common ground, languages as different +as Mandshu and Finnish, Malay and Siamese, should +have arrived at their present state, and might still be +treated as cognate tongues. And as I look upon this +process of agglutination as the only intelligible means +by which language can acquire a grammatical organization, +and clear the barrier which has arrested the +growth of the Chinese idiom, I felt justified in applying +the principles derived from the formation of the +Turanian languages to the Aryan and Semitic families. +They also must have passed through an agglutinative +stage, and it is during that period alone that we can +account for the gradual divergence and individualization +of what we afterwards call the Aryan and Semitic +forms of speech. If we can account for the different +appearance of Mandshu and Finnish, we can also account +for the distance between Hebrew and Sanskrit. +It is true that we do not know the Aryan speech during +its agglutinative period, but we can infer what it +was when we see languages like Finnish and Turkish +approaching more and more to an Aryan type. Such +has been the advance which Turkish has made towards +inflectional forms, that Professor Ewald claims for it +<pb n='338'/><anchor id='Pg338'/> +the title of a synthetic language, a title which he gives +to the Aryan and Semitic dialects after they have left +the agglutinative stage, and entered into a process of +phonetic corruption and dissolution. <q>Many of its +component parts,</q> he says, <q>though they were no +doubt originally, as in every language, independent +words, have been reduced to mere vowels, or have +been lost altogether, so that we must infer their former +presence by the changes which they have wrought +in the body of the word. <emph>Göz</emph> means eye, and <emph>gör</emph>, +to see; <emph>ish</emph>, deed, and <emph>ir</emph>, to do; +<emph>îtsh</emph>, the interior, <emph>gîr</emph>, +to enter.</q><note place='foot'>Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen, +1855, p. 298.</note> Nay, he goes so far as to admit some +formal elements which Turkish shares in common with +the Aryan family, and which therefore could only date +from a period when both were still in their agglutinative +infancy. For instance, <emph>di</emph>, as exponent of a past +action; <emph>ta</emph>, as the sign of the past participle of the passive; +<emph>lu</emph>, as a suffix to form adjectives, +&c.<note place='foot'>Ibid., p. 302, note.</note> This is +more than I should venture to assert. +</p> + +<p> +Taking this view of the gradual formation of language +by agglutination, as opposed to intussusception, +it is hardly necessary to say that, if I speak of a +Turanian family of speech, I use the word family in a +different sense from that which it has with regard to +the Aryan and Semitic languages. In my Letter on +the Turanian languages, which has been the subject of +such fierce attacks from those who believe in different +beginnings of language and mankind, I had explained +this repeatedly, and I had preferred the term of <emph>group</emph> +for the Turanian languages, in order to express as +clearly as possible that the relation between Turkish +<pb n='339'/><anchor id='Pg339'/> +and Mandshu, between Tamil and Finnish, was a different +one, not in degree only, but in kind, from that +between Sanskrit and Greek. <q>These Turanian languages,</q> +I said (p. 216), <q>cannot be considered as +standing to each other in the same relation as Hebrew +and Arabic, Sanskrit and Greek.</q> <q>They are radii +diverging from a common centre, not children of a +common parent.</q> And still they are not so widely +distant as Hebrew and Sanskrit, because none of them +has entered into that new phase of growth or decay +(p. 218) through which the Semitic and Aryan languages +passed after they had been settled, individualized, +and nationalized. +</p> + +<p> +The real object of my Essay was therefore a defensive +one. It was to show how rash it was to speak of +different independent beginnings in the history of human +speech, before a single argument had been brought +forward to establish the necessity of such an admission. +The impossibility of a common origin of language has +never been proved, but, in order to remove what were +considered difficulties affecting the theory of a common +origin, I felt it my duty to show practically, and by the +very history of the Turanian languages, how such a +theory was possible, or as I say in one instance only, +probable. I endeavored to show how even the most distant +members of the Turanian family, the one spoken +in the north, the other in the south of Asia, the <emph>Finnic</emph> +and the <emph>Tamulic</emph>, have preserved in their grammatical +organization traces of a former unity; and, if my opponents +admit that I have proved the ante-Brahmanic +or Tamulic inhabitants of India to belong to the Turanian +family, they can hardly have been aware that if +this, the most extreme point of my argument be conceded, +<pb n='340'/><anchor id='Pg340'/> +everything else is involved, and must follow by +necessity. +</p> + +<p> +Yet I did not call the last chapter of my Essay, +<q>On the Necessity of a common origin of Language,</q> +but <q>On the Possibility;</q> and, in answer to the +opinions advanced by the opposite party, I summed up +my defence in these two paragraphs:— +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> +<p> +I. +</p> + +<p> +<q>Nothing necessitates the admission of different independent +beginnings for the <emph>material</emph> elements of the +Turanian, Semitic, and Aryan branches of speech;—nay, +it is possible even now to point out radicals +which, under various changes and disguises, have been +current in these three branches ever since their first +separation.</q> +</p> + +<p> +II. +</p> + +<p> +<q>Nothing necessitates the admission of different +beginnings for the formal elements of the Turanian, +Semitic, and Aryan branches of speech;—and though +it is impossible to derive the Aryan system of grammar +from the Semitic, or the Semitic from the Aryan, +we can perfectly understand how, either through individual +influences, or by the wear and tear of speech in +its own continuous working, the different systems of +grammar of Asia and Europe may have been produced.</q> +</p> +</quote> + +<p> +It will be seen, from the very wording of these two +paragraphs, that my object was to deny the necessity +of independent beginnings, and to assert the possibility +of a common origin of language. I have been accused +<pb n='341'/><anchor id='Pg341'/> +of having been biassed in my researches by an implicit +belief in the common origin of mankind. I do not +deny that I hold this belief, and, if it wanted confirmation, +that confirmation has been supplied by Darwin's +book <q>On the Origin of Species.</q><note place='foot'><p><q>Here the +lines converge as they recede into the geological ages, and +point to conclusions which, upon Darwin's theory, are inevitable, but hardly +welcome. The very first step backward makes the negro and the Hottentot +our blood-relations; not that reason or Scripture objects to that, though +pride may.</q> Asa Gray, <q>Natural Selection not inconsistent with Natural +Theology,</q> 1861, p. 5. +</p> +<p> +<q>One good effect is already manifest, its enabling the advocates of the +hypothesis of a multiplicity of human species to perceive the double insecurity +of their ground. When the races of men are admitted to be of one +species, the corollary, that they are of one origin, may be expected to follow. +Those who allow them to be of one species must admit an actual +diversification into strongly marked and persistent varieties; while those, +on the other hand, who recognize several or numerous human species, will +hardly be able to maintain that such species were primordial and supernatural +in the ordinary sense of the word.</q> Asa Gray, Nat. Sel. p. 54.</p></note> But I defy my +adversaries to point out one single passage where I +have mixed up scientific with theological arguments. +Only if I am told that no <q>quiet observer would ever +have conceived the idea of deriving all mankind from +one pair, unless the Mosaic records had taught it,</q> I +must be allowed to say in reply, that this idea on the +contrary is so natural, so consistent with all human +laws of reasoning, that, as far as I know, there has +been no nation on earth which, if it possessed any traditions +on the origin of mankind, did not derive the +human race from one pair, if not from one person. +The author of the Mosaic records, therefore, though +stripped, before the tribunal of Physical Science, of his +claims as an inspired writer, may at least claim the +modest title of a quiet observer, and if his conception +of the physical unity of the human race can be proved +to be an error, it is an error which he shares in common +<pb n='342'/><anchor id='Pg342'/> +with other quiet observers, such as Humboldt, +Bunsen, Prichard, and Owen.<note place='foot'>Professor Pott, +the most distinguished advocate of the polygenetic dogma, +has pleaded the necessity of admitting more than one beginning for the +human race and for language in an article in the Journal of the German +Oriental Society, ix. 405, <q>Max Müller und die Kennzeichen der Sprachverwandtschaft,</q> +1855; in a treatise <q>Die Ungleichheit menschlicher Rassen,</q> +1856; and in the new edition of his <q>Etymologische Forschungen,</q> +1861.</note> +</p> + +<p> +The only question which remains to be answered is +this, Was it one and the same volume of water which +supplied all the lateral channels of speech? or, to drop +all metaphor, are the roots which were joined together +according to the radical, the terminational, and inflectional +systems, identically the same? The only way to +answer, or at least to dispose of, this question is to consider +the nature and origin of roots; and we shall then +have reached the extreme limits to which inductive +reasoning can carry us in our researches into the mysteries +of human speech. +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='343'/><anchor id='Pg343'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Lecture IX. The Theoretical Stage, And The Origin Of +Language.</head> + +<p> +<q>In examining the history of mankind, as well as in +examining the phenomena of the material world, when +we cannot trace the process by which an event <emph>has been</emph> +produced, it is often of importance to be able to show +how it <emph>may have been</emph> produced by natural causes. Thus, +although it is impossible to determine with certainty +what the steps were by which any particular language +was formed, yet if we can show, from the known principles +of human nature, how all its various parts <emph>might</emph> +gradually have arisen, the mind is not only to a certain +degree satisfied, but a check is given to that indolent +philosophy which refers to a miracle whatever appearances, +both in the natural and moral worlds, it is unable +to explain.</q><note place='foot'>Dugald Stewart, vol. iii. p. 35.</note> +</p> + +<p> +This quotation from an eminent Scotch philosopher +contains the best advice that could be given to the student +of the science of language, when he approaches +the problem which we have to examine to-day, namely, +the origin of language. Though we have stripped that +problem of the perplexing and mysterious aspect which +it presented to the philosophers of old, yet, even in its +simplest form, it seems to be almost beyond the reach +of the human understanding. +</p> + +<pb n='344'/><anchor id='Pg344'/> + +<p> +If we were asked the riddle how images of the eye +and all the sensations of our senses could be represented +by sounds, nay, could be so embodied in sounds +as to express thought and excite thought, we should +probably give it up as the question of a madman, who, +mixing up the most heterogeneous subjects, attempted +to change color into sound and sound into thought.<note place='foot'>Herder, +as quoted by Steinthal, <q>Ursprung der Sprache,</q> s. 39.</note> +Yet this is the riddle which we have now to solve. +</p> + +<p> +It is quite clear that we have no means of solving the +problem of the origin of language <emph>historically</emph>, or of explaining +it as a matter of fact which happened once in +a certain locality and at a certain time. History does +not begin till long after mankind had acquired the +power of language, and even the most ancient traditions +are silent as to the manner in which man came in possession +of his earliest thoughts and words. Nothing, +no doubt, would be more interesting than to know +from historical documents the exact process by which +the first man began to lisp his first words, and thus to +be rid forever of all the theories on the origin of speech. +But this knowledge is denied us; and, if it had been +otherwise, we should probably be quite unable to understand +those primitive events in the history of the +human mind.<note place='foot'><q>In all these paths of research, when we travel far +backwards the aspect of the earlier portions becomes very different from that of the +advanced part on which we now stand; but in all cases the path is lost in +obscurity as it is traced backwards towards its starting point:—it becomes +not only invisible, but unimaginable; it is not only an interruption, but an +abyss, which interposes itself between us and any intelligible beginning of +things.</q> Whewell, Indications, p. 166.</note> We are told that the first man was the +son of God, that God created him in His own image, +formed him of the dust of the ground, and breathed +into his nostrils the breath of life. These are simple +<pb n='345'/><anchor id='Pg345'/> +facts, and to be accepted as such; if we begin to reason +on them, the edge of the human understanding glances +off. Our mind is so constituted that it cannot apprehend +the absolute beginning or the absolute end of +anything. If we tried to conceive the first man created +as a child, and gradually unfolding his physical and +mental powers, we could not understand his living for +<emph>one</emph> day without supernatural aid. If, on the contrary, +we tried to conceive the first man created full-grown in +body and mind, the conception of an effect without a +cause, of a full-grown mind without a previous growth, +would equally transcend our reasoning powers. It is +the same with the first beginnings of language. Theologians +who claim for language a divine origin drift into +the most dangerous anthropomorphism, when they enter +into any details as to the manner in which they +suppose the Deity to have compiled a dictionary and +grammar in order to teach them to the first man, as a +schoolmaster teaches the deaf and dumb. And they do +not see that, even if all their premises were granted, +they would have explained no more than how the first +man might have learnt a language, if there was a language +ready made for him. How that language was +made would remain as great a mystery as ever. Philosophers, +on the contrary, who imagine that the first man, +though left to himself, would gradually have emerged +from a state of mutism and have invented words for +every new conception that arose in his mind, forget +that man could not by his own power have acquired <emph>the +faculty</emph> of speech which is the distinctive character of +mankind,<note place='foot'><q>Der Mensch ist nur Mensch durch Sprache; um aber die +Sprache zu erfinden, müsste er schon Mensch sein.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>W. von +Humboldt, Sämmtliche +Werke</hi>, b. iii. s. 252. The same argument is ridden to death by Süssmilch, +<q>Versuch eines Beweises dass die erste Sprache ihrem Ursprung nicht +vom Menschen, sondern allein vom Schöpfer erhalten +habe.</q> Berlin, 1766.</note> unattained and unattainable by the mute +<pb n='346'/><anchor id='Pg346'/> +creation. It shows a want of appreciation as to the +real bearings of our problem, if philosophers appeal to +the fact that children are born without language, and +gradually emerge from mutism to the full command of +articulate speech. We want no explanation how birds +learn to fly, created as they are with organs adapted to +that purpose. Nor do we wish to inquire how children +learn to use the various faculties with which the human +body and soul are endowed. We want to gain, if possible, +an insight into the original faculty of speech; and +for that purpose I fear it is as useless to watch the first +stammerings of children, as it would be to repeat the +experiment of the Egyptian king who intrusted two +new-born infants to a shepherd, with the injunction to +let them suck a goat's milk, and to speak no word in +their presence, but to observe what word they would +first utter.<note place='foot'>Farrar, Origin of Language, p. +10; Grimm, Ursprung der Sprache, s. 32. +The word βεκός, which these children are reported to have uttered, and +which, in the Phrygian language, meant bread, thus proving, it was supposed, +that the Phrygian was the primitive language of mankind, is derived +from the same root which exists in the English, to bake. How these +unfortunate children came by the idea of baked bread, involving the ideas +of corn, mill, oven, fire, &c., seems never to have struck the ancient sages +of Egypt.</note> The same experiment is said to have been +repeated by the Swabian emperor, Frederic II., by +James IV. of Scotland, and by one of the Mogul emperors +of India. But, whether for the purpose of finding +out which was the primitive language of mankind, +or of discovering how far language was natural to man, +the experiments failed to throw any light on the problem +before us. Children, in learning to speak, do not +invent language. Language is there ready made for +<pb n='347'/><anchor id='Pg347'/> +them. It has been there for thousands of years. They +acquire the use of a language, and, as they grow up, +they may acquire the use of a second and a third. It +is useless to inquire whether infants, left to themselves, +would invent a language. It would be impossible, unnatural, +and illegal to try the experiment, and, without +repeated experiments, the assertions of those who believe +and those who disbelieve the possibility of children inventing +a language of their own, are equally valueless. +All we know for certain is, that an English child, if +left to itself, would never begin to speak English, and +that history supplies no instance of any language having +thus been invented. +</p> + +<p> +If we want to gain an insight into the faculty of +flying, which is a characteristic feature of birds, all +we can do is, first, to compare the structure of birds +with that of other animals which are devoid of that +faculty, and secondly, to examine the conditions under +which the act of flying becomes possible. It is the +same with speech. Speech is a specific faculty of man. +It distinguishes man from all other creatures; and if +we wish to acquire more definite ideas as to the real +nature of human speech, all we can do is to compare +man with those animals that seem to come nearest to +him, and thus to try to discover what he shares in +common with these animals, and what is peculiar to +him and to him alone. After we have discovered this, +we may proceed to inquire into the conditions under +which speech becomes possible, and we shall then have +done all that we can do, considering that the instruments +of our knowledge, wonderful as they are, are +yet far too weak to carry us into all the regions to +which we may soar on the wings of our imagination. +</p> + +<pb n='348'/><anchor id='Pg348'/> + +<p> +In comparing man with the other animals, we need +not enter here into the physiological questions whether +the difference between the body of an ape and the body +of a man is one of degree or of kind. However that +question is settled by physiologists we need not be +afraid. If the structure of a mere worm is such as +to fill the human mind with awe, if a single glimpse +which we catch of the infinite wisdom displayed in the +organs of the lowest creature gives us an intimation of +the wisdom of its Divine Creator far transcending the +powers of our conception, how are we to criticise and +disparage the most highly organized creatures of His +creation, creatures as wonderfully made as we ourselves? +Are there not many creatures on many points +more perfect even than man? Do we not envy the +lion's strength, the eagle's eye, the wings of every +bird? If there existed animals altogether as perfect +as man in their physical structure, nay, even more perfect, +no thoughtful man would ever be uneasy. His +true superiority rests on different grounds. <q>I confess,</q> +Sydney Smith writes, <q>I feel myself so much +at ease about the superiority of mankind—I have +such a marked and decided contempt for the understanding +of every baboon I have ever seen—I feel +so sure that the blue ape without a tail will never +rival us in poetry, painting, and music, that I see no +reason whatever that justice may not be done to the +few fragments of soul and tatters of understanding +which they may really possess.</q> The playfulness of +Sydney Smith in handling serious and sacred subjects +has of late been found fault with by many: but humor +is a safer sign of strong convictions and perfect +safety than guarded solemnity. +</p> + +<pb n='349'/><anchor id='Pg349'/> + +<p> +With regard to our own problem, no one can doubt +that certain animals possess all the physical requirements +for articulate speech. There is no letter of the +alphabet which a parrot will not learn to pronounce.<note place='foot'><q>L'usage +de la main, la marche à deux pieds, la ressemblance, quoique +grossière, de la face, tous les actes qui peuvent résulter de cette conformité +d'organisation, ont fait donner au singe le nom d'<emph>homme sauvage</emph>, par des +homines à la vérité qui l'étaient à demi, et qui ne savaient comparer que +les rapports extérieurs. Que serait-ce, si, par une combinaison de nature +aussi possible que toute autre, le singe eût eu la voix du perroquet, et, +comme lui, la faculté de la parole? Le singe parlant eût rendu muette +d'étonnement l'espèce humaine entière, et l'aurait séduite au point que le +philosophe aurait eu grand'peine à démontrer qu'avec tous ces beaux +attributs humains le singe n'en était pas moins une bête. Il est donc +heureux, pour notre intelligence, que la nature ait séparé et placé, dans +deux espèces très-différentes, l'imitation de la parole et celle de nos +gestes.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Buffon</hi>, as quoted by Flourens, p. 77.</note> +The fact, therefore, that the parrot is without a language +of his own, must be explained by a difference +between the <emph>mental</emph>, not between the <emph>physical</emph>, faculties +of the animal and man; and it is by a comparison of +the mental faculties alone, such as we find them in +man and brutes, that we may hope to discover what +constitutes the indispensable qualification for language, +a qualification to be found in man alone, and in no +other creature on earth. +</p> + +<p> +I say <emph>mental faculties</emph>, and I mean to claim a large +share of what we call our mental faculties for the +higher animals. These animals have <emph>sensation</emph>, <emph>perception</emph>, +<emph>memory</emph>, <emph>will</emph>, and <emph>intellect</emph>, only we must restrict +intellect to the comparing or interlacing of single +perceptions. All these points can be proved by irrefragable +evidence, and that evidence has never, I believe, +been summed up with greater lucidity and power +than in one of the last publications of M. P. Flourens, +<q>De la Raison, du Génie, et de la Folie:</q> Paris, +<pb n='350'/><anchor id='Pg350'/> +1861. There are no doubt many people who are as +much frightened at the idea that brutes have souls and +are able to think, as by <q>the blue ape without a tail.</q> +But their fright is entirely of their own making. If +people will use such words as soul or thought without +making it clear to themselves and others what they +mean by them, these words will slip away under their +feet, and the result must be painful. If we once ask +the question, Have brutes a soul? we shall never arrive +at any conclusion; for <emph>soul</emph> has been so many times +defined by philosophers from Aristotle down to Hegel, +that it means everything and nothing. Such has been +the confusion caused by the promiscuous employment +of the ill-defined terms of mental philosophy that we +find Descartes representing brutes as living machines, +whereas Leibniz claims for them not only souls, but +immortal souls. <q>Next to the error of those who +deny the existence of God,</q> says Descartes, <q>there +is none so apt to lead weak minds from the right path +of virtue, as to think that the soul of brutes is of the +same nature as our own; and, consequently, that we +have nothing to fear or to hope after this life, any more +than flies or ants; whereas, if we know how much they +differ, we understand much better that <emph>our</emph> soul is quite +independent of the body, and consequently not subject +to die with the body.</q> +</p> + +<p> +The spirit of these remarks is excellent, but the argument +is extremely weak. It does not follow that +brutes have no souls because they have no human +souls. It does not follow that the souls of men are +not immortal, because the souls of brutes are not immortal; +nor has the <emph>major premiss</emph> ever been proved by +any philosopher, namely, that the souls of brutes must +<pb n='351'/><anchor id='Pg351'/> +necessarily be destroyed and annihilated by death. +Leibniz, who has defended the immortality of the human +soul with stronger arguments than even Descartes, +writes:—<q>I found at last how the souls of brutes and +their sensations do not at all interfere with the immortality +of human souls; on the contrary, nothing serves +better to establish our natural immortality than to believe +that all souls are imperishable.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Instead of entering into these perplexities, which are +chiefly due to the loose employment of ill-defined terms, +let us simply look at the facts. Every unprejudiced +observer will admit that— +</p> + +<p> +1. Brutes see, hear, taste, smell, and feel; that is to +say, they have five senses, just like ourselves, neither +more nor less. They have both sensation and perception, +a point which has been illustrated by M. Flourens +by the most interesting experiments. If the roots of +the optic nerve are removed, the retina in the eye of +a bird ceases to be excitable, the iris is no longer movable; +the animal is blind, because it has lost the organ +of <emph>sensation</emph>. If, on the contrary, the cerebral lobes are +removed, the eye remains pure and sound, the retina +excitable, the iris movable. The eye is preserved, yet +the animal cannot see, because it has lost the organs of +<emph>perception</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +2. Brutes have sensations of pleasure and pain. A +dog that is beaten behaves exactly like a child that is +chastised, and a dog that is fed and fondled exhibits the +same signs of satisfaction as a boy under the same circumstances. +We can only judge from signs, and if +they are to be trusted in the case of children, they +must be trusted likewise in the case of brutes. +</p> + +<p> +3. Brutes do not forget, or as philosophers would +<pb n='352'/><anchor id='Pg352'/> +say, brutes have memory. They know their masters, +they know their home; they evince joy on recognizing +those who have been kind to them, and they bear +malice for years to those by whom they have been insulted +or ill-treated. Who does not recollect the dog +Argos in the Odyssey, who, after so many years' absence, +was the first to recognize Ulysses?<note place='foot'>Odyssey, xvii. 300.</note> +</p> + +<p> +4. Brutes are able to compare and to distinguish. +A parrot will take up a nut, and throw it down again, +without attempting to crack it. He has found that it +is light; this he could discover only by comparing the +weight of the good nuts with that of the bad: and he +has found that it has no kernel; this he could discover +only by what philosophers would dignify with the +grand title of syllogism, namely, <q>all light nuts are +hollow; this is a light nut, therefore this nut is hollow.</q> +</p> + +<p> +5. Brutes have a will of their own. I appeal to any +one who has ever ridden a restive horse. +</p> + +<p> +6. Brutes show signs of shame and pride. Here +again any one who has to deal with dogs, who has +watched a retriever with sparkling eyes placing a partridge +at his master's feet, or a hound slinking away +with his tail between his legs from the huntsman's +call, will agree that these signs admit of but one interpretation. +The difficulty begins when we use philosophical +language, when we claim for brutes a moral +sense, a conscience, a power of distinguishing good and +evil; and, as we gain nothing by these scholastic terms, +it is better to avoid them altogether. +</p> + +<p> +7. Brutes show signs of love and hatred. There +are well-authenticated stories of dogs following their +<pb n='353'/><anchor id='Pg353'/> +masters to the grave, and refusing food from any one. +Nor is there any doubt that brutes will watch their +opportunity till they revenge themselves on those whom +they dislike. +</p> + +<p> +If, with all these facts before us, we deny that brutes +have sensation, perception, memory, will, and intellect, +we ought to bring forward powerful arguments for interpreting +the signs which we observe in brutes so differently +from those which we observe in men. +</p> + +<p> +Some philosophers imagine they have explained everything, +if they ascribe to brutes <emph>instinct</emph> instead of +<emph>intellect</emph>. But, if we take these two words in their +usual acceptations, they surely do not exclude each +other.<note place='foot'><q>The evident marks of +reasoning in the other animals,—of reasoning +which I cannot but think as unquestionable as the instincts that mingle +with it.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Brown, Works</hi>, vol. i. +p. 446.</note> There are instincts in man as well as in brutes. +A child takes his mother's breast by instinct; the +spider weaves its net by instinct; the bee builds her +cell by instinct. No one would ascribe to the child a +knowledge of physiology because it employs the exact +muscles which are required for sucking; nor shall we +claim for the spider a knowledge of mechanics, or for +the bee an acquaintance with geometry, because <emph>we</emph> +could not do what they do without a study of these +sciences. But what if we tear a spider's web, and see +the spider examining the mischief that is done, and +either giving up his work in despair, or endeavoring to +mend it as well as may be?<note place='foot'>Flourens, +De la Raison, p. 51.</note> Surely here we have +the instinct of weaving controlled by observation, +by comparison, by reflection, by judgment. Instinct, +whether mechanical or moral, is more prominent in +<pb n='354'/><anchor id='Pg354'/> +brutes than in man; but it exists in both, as much as +intellect is shared by both. +</p> + +<p> +Where, then, is the difference between brute and +man?<note place='foot'>To allow that <q>brutes have certain mental endowments in common +with men,</q> ... <q>desires, affections, memory, simple imagination, or the +power of reproducing the sensible past in mental pictures, and even judgment +of the simple or intuition kind;</q>—that <q>they compare and judge,</q> +(Mem. Amer. Acad. 8, p. 118,)—is to concede that the intellect of brutes +really acts, so far as we know, like human intellect, as far as it goes; for +the philosophical logicians tell us that all reasoning is reducible to a series +of simple judgments. And Aristotle declares that even reminiscence,—which +is, we suppose, <q>reproducing the sensible past in mental pictures,</q>—is +a sort of reasoning (τὶ ἀναμιμνήσκεσθαί ἐστι οἱον συλλογισμός τισ.) +Asa Gray, Natural Selection, &c., p. 58, <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</note> +What is it that man can do, and of which +we find no signs, no rudiments, in the whole brute +world? I answer without hesitation: the one great +barrier between the brute and man is <emph>Language</emph>. Man +speaks, and no brute has ever uttered a word. Language +is our Rubicon, and no brute will dare to cross +it. This is our matter of fact answer to those who +speak of development, who think they discover the rudiments +at least of all human faculties in apes, and who +would fain keep open the possibility that man is only +a more favored beast, the triumphant conqueror in the +primeval struggle for life. Language is something +more palpable than a fold of the brain, or an angle of +the skull. It admits of no cavilling, and no process of +natural selection will ever distill significant words out +of the notes of birds or the cries of beasts. +</p> + +<p> +Language, however, is only the outward sign. We +may point to it in our arguments, we may challenge +our opponent to produce anything approaching to it +from the whole brute world. But if this were all, if +the art of employing articulate sounds for the purpose +of communicating our impressions were the only thing +<pb n='355'/><anchor id='Pg355'/> +by which we could assert our superiority over the +brute creation, we might not unreasonably feel somewhat +uneasy at having the gorilla so close on our +heels. +</p> + +<p> +It cannot be denied that brutes, though they do not +use articulate sounds for that purpose, have nevertheless +means of their own for communicating with each +other. When a whale is struck, the whole shoal, +though widely dispersed, are instantly made aware of +the presence of an enemy; and when the grave-digger +beetle finds the carcass of a mole, he hastens to communicate +the discovery to his fellows, and soon returns +with his <emph>four</emph> confederates.<note place='foot'>Conscience, +Boek der Natuer, vi., quoted by Marsh, p. 32.</note> It is evident, too, that +dogs, though they do not speak, possess the power of +understanding much that is said to them, their names +and the calls of their master; and other animals, such +as the parrot, can pronounce every articulate sound. +Hence, although for the purpose of philosophical warfare, +articulate language would still form an impregnable +position, yet it is but natural that for our own satisfaction +we should try to find out in what the strength +of our position really consists; or, in other words, that +we should try to discover that inward power of which +language is the outward sign and manifestation. +</p> + +<p> +For this purpose it will be best to examine the +opinions of those who approached our problem from +another point; who, instead of looking for outward +and palpable signs of difference between brute and +man, inquired into the inward mental faculties, and +tried to determine the point where man transcends +the barriers of the brute intellect. That point, if +truly determined, ought to coincide with the starting-point +<pb n='356'/><anchor id='Pg356'/> +of language: and, if so, that coincidence ought +to explain the problem which occupies us at present. +</p> + +<p> +I shall read an extract from Locke's Essay concerning +Human Understanding. +</p> + +<p> +After having explained how universal ideas are +made, how the mind, having observed the same color +in chalk, and snow, and milk, comprehends these single +perceptions under the general conception of whiteness, +Locke continues:<note place='foot'>Book ii. chapter xi. +§ 10.</note> <q>If it may be doubted, whether +beasts compound and enlarge their ideas that way to +any degree: this, I think, I may be positive in, that +the power of abstracting is not at all in them; and +that the having of general ideas is that which puts a +perfect distinction betwixt man and brutes, and is an +excellency which the faculties of brutes do by no +means attain to.</q> +</p> + +<p> +If Locke is right in considering the having general +ideas as the distinguishing feature between man and +brutes, and, if we ourselves are right in pointing to +language as the one palpable distinction between the +two, it would seem to follow that language is the outward +sign and realization of that inward faculty which +is called the faculty of abstraction, but which is better +known to us by the homely name of Reason. +</p> + +<p> +Let us now look back to the result of our former +Lectures. It was this. After we had explained everything +in the growth of language that can be explained, +there remained in the end, as the only inexplicable residuum, +what we called <emph>roots</emph>. These roots formed the +constituent elements of all languages. This discovery +has simplified the problem of the origin of language +immensely. It has taken away all excuse for those +<pb n='357'/><anchor id='Pg357'/> +rapturous descriptions of language which invariably +preceded the argument that language must have a +divine origin. We shall hear no more of that wonderful +instrument which can express all we see, and +hear, and taste, and touch, and smell; which is the +breathing image of the whole world; which gives form +to the airy feelings of our souls, and body to the loftiest +dreams of our imagination; which can arrange in accurate +perspective the past, the present, and the future, +and throw over everything the varying hues of certainty, +of doubt, of contingency. All this is perfectly +true, but it is no longer wonderful, at least not in the +Arabian Nights sense of that word. <q>The speculative +mind,</q> as Dr. Ferguson says, <q>in comparing the first +and last steps of the progress of language, feels the +same sort of amazement with a traveller, who, after +rising insensibly on the slope of a hill, comes to look +from a precipice of an almost unfathomable depth to +the summit of which he scarcely believes himself to +have ascended without supernatural aid.</q> To certain +minds it is a disappointment to be led down again by +the hand of history from that high summit. They +prefer the unintelligible which they can admire, to the +intelligible which they can only understand. But to a +mature mind reality is more attractive than fiction, and +simplicity more wonderful than complication. Roots +may seem dry things as compared with the poetry of +Goethe. Yet there is something more truly wonderful +in a root than in all the lyrics of the world. +</p> + +<p> +What, then, are these roots? In our modern languages +roots can only be discovered by scientific analysis, +and, even as far back as Sanskrit, we may say +that no root was ever used as a noun or as a verb. +<pb n='358'/><anchor id='Pg358'/> +But originally roots were thus used, and in Chinese we +have fortunately preserved to us a representative of +that primitive radical stage which, like the granite, +underlies all other strata of human speech. The +Aryan root <emph>DÂ</emph>, to give, appears in Sanskrit <emph>dâ-nam</emph>, +<emph>donum</emph>, gift, as a substantive; in <emph>do</emph>, +Sanskrit <emph>dadâmi</emph>, +Greek <emph>di-dō-mi</emph>, I give, as a verb; but the root D +can never be used by itself. In Chinese, on the contrary, +the root TA, as such, is used in the sense of a +noun, greatness; of a verb, to be great; of an adverb, +greatly or much. Roots therefore are not, as is commonly +maintained, merely scientific abstractions, but +they were used originally as real words. What we +want to find out is this, What inward mental phase +is it that corresponds to these roots, as the germs of +human speech? +</p> + +<p> +Two theories have been started to solve this problem, +which, for shortness' sake, I shall call the <emph>Bow-wow +theory</emph> and the <emph>Pooh-pooh theory</emph>.<note place='foot'>I +regret to find that the expressions here used have given offence to +several of my reviewers. They were used because the names Onomatopoetic +and Interjectional are awkward and not very clear. They were not +intended to be disrespectful to those who hold the one or the other theory, +some of them scholars for whose achievements in comparative philology I +entertain the most sincere respect.</note> +</p> + +<p> +According to the first, roots are imitations of sounds, +according to the second, they are involuntary interjections. +The first theory was very popular among the +philosophers of the eighteenth century, and, as it is still +held by many distinguished scholars and philosophers, +we must examine it more carefully. It is supposed +then that man, being as yet mute, heard the voices of +birds and dogs and cows, the thunder of the clouds, +the roaring of the sea, the rustling of the forest, the +<pb n='359'/><anchor id='Pg359'/> +murmurs of the brook, and the whisper of the breeze. +He tried to imitate these sounds, and finding his +mimicking cries useful as signs of the objects from +which they proceeded, he followed up the idea and +elaborated language. This view was most ably defended +by Herder.<note place='foot'>A fuller account of +the views of Herder and other philosophers on the +origin of language may be found in Steinthal's useful little work, <q>Der +Ursprung der Sprache:</q> Berlin, 1853.</note> <q>Man,</q> he says, <q>shows conscious +reflection when his soul acts so freely that it +may separate, in the ocean of sensations which rush +into it through the senses, one single wave, arrest it, +regard it, being conscious all the time of regarding this +one single wave. Man proves his conscious reflection +when, out of the dream of images that float past his +senses, he can gather himself up and wake for a moment, +dwelling intently on one image, fixing it with a +bright and tranquil glance, and discovering for himself +those signs by which he knows that <emph>this</emph> is <emph>this</emph> image +and no other. Man proves his conscious reflection +when he not only perceives vividly and distinctly all +the features of an object, but is able to separate and +recognize one or more of them as its distinguishing +features.</q> For instance, <q>Man sees a lamb. He +does not see it like the ravenous wolf. He is not +disturbed by any uncontrollable instinct. He wants +to know it, but he is neither drawn towards it nor +repelled from it by his senses. The lamb stands before +him, as represented by his senses, white, soft, +woolly. The conscious and reflecting soul of man +looks for a distinguishing mark;—the lamb bleats!—the +mark is found. The bleating which made the +strongest impression, which stood apart from all other +<pb n='360'/><anchor id='Pg360'/> +impressions of sight or touch, remains in the soul. +The lamb returns—white, soft, woolly. The soul +sees, touches, reflects, looks for a mark. The lamb +bleats, and now the soul has recognized it. <q>Ah, +thou art the bleating animal,</q> the soul says within +herself; and the sound of bleating, perceived as the +distinguishing mark of the lamb, becomes the name +of the lamb. It was the comprehended mark, the +word. And what is the whole of our language but +a collection of such words?</q> +</p> + +<p> +Our answer is, that though there are names in +every language formed by mere imitation of sound, yet +these constitute a very small proportion of our dictionary. +They are the playthings, not the tools, of language, +and any attempt to reduce the most common +and necessary words to imitative roots ends in complete +failure. Herder himself, after having most strenuously +defended this theory of Onomatopoieia, as it is called, +and having gained a prize which the Berlin Academy +had offered for the best essay on the origin of language, +renounced it openly towards the latter years of his life, +and threw himself in despair into the arms of those +who looked upon languages as miraculously revealed. +We cannot deny the possibility that <emph>a</emph> language might +have been formed on the principle of imitation; all we +say is, that as yet no language has been discovered +that was so formed. An Englishman in China,<note place='foot'>Farrar, p. 74.</note> seeing +a dish placed before him about which he felt +suspicious, and wishing to know whether it was a +duck, said, with an interrogative accent, +</p> + +<p> +<emph>Quack quack?</emph> +</p> + +<p> +He received the clear and straightforward answer, +</p> + +<p> +<emph>Bow-wow!</emph> +</p> + +<pb n='361'/><anchor id='Pg361'/> + +<p> +This, no doubt, was as good as the most eloquent +conversation on the same subject between an Englishman +and a French waiter. But I doubt whether it +deserves the name of language. We do not speak of +a <emph>bow-wow</emph>, but of a dog. We speak of a cow, not of +a <emph>moo</emph>. Of a lamb, not of a <emph>baa</emph>. It is the same in +more ancient languages, such as Greek, Latin, and +Sanskrit. If this principle of Onomatopoieia is applicable +anywhere, it would be in the formation of the +names of animals. Yet we listen in vain for any similarity +between goose and cackling, hen and clucking, +duck and quacking, sparrow and chirping, dove and +cooing, hog and grunting, cat and mewing, between +dog and barking, yelping, snarling, or growling. +</p> + +<p> +There are of course some names, such as <emph>cuckoo</emph>, +which are clearly formed by an imitation of sound. +But words of this kind are, like artificial flowers, +without a root. They are sterile, and are unfit to +express anything beyond the one object which they +imitate. If you remember the variety of derivatives +that could be formed from the root <emph>spac</emph>, to see, you +will at once perceive the difference between the fabrication +of such a word as <emph>cuckoo</emph>, and the true natural +growth of words. +</p> + +<p> +Let us compare two words such as <emph>cuckoo</emph> and +<emph>raven</emph>. <emph>Cuckoo</emph> in English is clearly a mere imitation +of the cry of that bird, even more so than the corresponding +terms in Greek, Sanskrit, and Latin. In +these languages the imitative element has received the +support of a derivative suffix; we have <emph>kokila</emph> in Sanskrit, +and <emph>kokkyx</emph> in Greek, <emph>cuculus</emph> in +Latin.<note place='foot'>Pott, Etymologische Forschungen, i. 87; Zeitschrift, +iii. 43.</note> <emph>Cuckoo</emph> +is, in fact, a modern word, which has taken the place +<pb n='362'/><anchor id='Pg362'/> +of the Anglo-Saxon <emph>geac</emph>, the German <emph>Gauch</emph>, and, +being purely onomatopoëtic, it is of course not liable +to the changes of Grimm's Law. As the word <emph>cuckoo</emph> +predicates nothing but the sound of a particular bird, it +could never be applied for expressing any general quality +in which other animals might share; and the only +derivatives to which it might give rise are words expressive +of a metaphorical likeness with the bird. The +same applies to <emph>cock</emph>, the Sanskrit <emph>kukkuṭa</emph>. Here, too, +Grimm's Law does not apply, for both words were +intended to convey merely the cackling sound of the +bird; and, as this intention continued to be felt, +phonetic change was less likely to set in. The Sanskrit +<emph>kukkuṭa</emph> is not derived from any root, it simply repeats +the cry of the bird, and the only derivatives to which +it gives rise are metaphorical expressions, such as the +French <emph>coquet</emph>, originally strutting about like a cock; +<emph>coquetterie</emph>; <emph>cocart</emph>, conceited; +<emph>cocarde</emph>, a cockade; <emph>coquelicot</emph>, +originally a cock's comb, then the wild red +poppy, likewise so called from its similarity with a +cock's comb. +</p> + +<p> +Let us now examine the word <emph>raven</emph>. It might +seem at first, as if this also was merely onomatopoëtic. +Some people imagine they perceive a kind +of similarity between the word <emph>raven</emph> and the cry of +that bird. This seems still more so if we compare +the Anglo-Saxon <emph>hrafn</emph>, the German <emph>Rabe</emph>, Old High-German +<emph>hraban</emph>. The Sanskrit <emph>kârava</emph> also, the Latin +<emph>corvus</emph>, and the Greek <emph>korōnē</emph>, all are supposed to show +some similarity with the unmelodious sound of <emph>Maître +Corbeau</emph>. But as soon as we analyze the word we find +that it is of a different structure from <emph>cuckoo</emph> or <emph>cock</emph>. +It is derived from a root which has a general predicative +<pb n='363'/><anchor id='Pg363'/> +power. The root <emph>ru</emph> or <emph>kru</emph> is not a mere imitation +of the cry of the raven; it embraces many cries, from +the harshest to the softest, and it might have been +applied to the nightingale as well as to the raven. In +Sanskrit this root exists as <emph>ru</emph>, a verb which is applied +to the murmuring sound of rivers as well as to the +barking of dogs and the mooing of cows. From it are +derived numerous words in Sanskrit. In Latin we find +<emph>raucus</emph>, hoarse; <emph>rumor</emph>, a whisper; in German <emph>rûnen</emph>, +to speak low, and <emph>runa</emph>, mystery. The Latin <emph>lamentum</emph> +stands for an original <emph>ravimentum</emph> or <emph>cravimentum</emph>. +This root <emph>ru</emph> has several secondary forms, such as the Sanskrit +<emph>rud</emph>, to cry; the Latin <emph>rug</emph> in <emph>rugire</emph>, to howl; +the Greek <emph>kru</emph> or <emph>klu</emph>, in <emph>klaiō</emph>, +<emph>klausomai</emph>; the Sanskrit <emph>kruś</emph>, to shout; the Gothic +<emph>hrukjan</emph>, to crow, and <emph>hropjan</emph>, +to cry; the German <emph>rufen</emph>. Even the common +Aryan word for hearing is closely allied to this root. +It is <emph>śru</emph> in Sanskrit, <emph>klyō</emph> in Greek, <emph>cluo</emph> in +Latin; and before it took the recognized meaning of hearing, it +meant to sound, to ring. When a noise was to be +heard in a far distance, the man who first perceived +it might well have said I ring, for his ears were +sounding and ringing; and the same verb, if once +used as a transitive, expressed exactly what we mean +by I hear a noise. +</p> + +<p> +You will have perceived thus that the process which +led to the formation of the word <emph>kârava</emph> in Sanskrit +is quite distinct from that which produced <emph>cuckoo</emph>. +<emph>Kârava</emph><note place='foot'><emph>Kârava</emph>, explained in +Sanskrit by <emph>ku-rava</emph>, having a bad voice, is supposed +to be a mere dialectical corruption of <emph>krava</emph> or <emph>karva</emph>. +Κορώνη presupposes +κορων = κοροον = <emph>h</emph>(<emph>a</emph>)<emph>raban</emph>. +The Sanskrit <emph>kârava</emph> may, however, +be derived from <emph>kâru</emph>, singer; but in that case <emph>kâru</emph> must not be +derived from <emph>kṛi</emph>.</note> means a shouter, a caller, a crier. It might +<pb n='364'/><anchor id='Pg364'/> +have been applied to many birds; but it became the +traditional and recognized name for the crow. Cuckoo +could never mean anything but the cuckoo, and while +a word like <emph>raven</emph> has ever so many relations from a +<emph>rumor</emph> down to <emph>a row</emph>, cuckoo stands by itself like a +stick in a living hedge. +</p> + +<p> +It is curious to observe how apt we are to deceive +ourselves when we once adopt this system of Onomatopoieia. +Who does not imagine that he hears in the +word <q>thunder</q> an imitation of the rolling and rumbling +noise which the old Germans ascribed to their +God Thor playing at nine-pins? Yet <emph>thunder</emph> is +clearly the same word as the Latin <emph>tonitru</emph>. The root +is <emph>tan</emph>, to stretch. From this root <emph>tan</emph>, we have in +Greek <emph>tonos</emph>, our tone, <emph>tone</emph> being produced by the +stretching and vibrating of cords. In Sanskrit the +sound thunder is expressed by the same root <emph>tan</emph>, but +in the derivatives <emph>tanyu</emph>, <emph>tanyatu</emph>, and <emph>tanayitnu</emph>, +thundering, we perceive no trace of the rumbling noise +which we imagined we perceived in the Latin <emph>tonitru</emph> +and the English <emph>thunder</emph>. The very same root <emph>tan</emph>, to +stretch, yields some derivatives which are anything but +rough and noisy. The English <emph>tender</emph>, the French <emph>tendre</emph>, +the Latin <emph>tener</emph>, are derived from it. Like <emph>tenuis</emph>, +the Sanskrit <emph>tanu</emph>, the English <emph>thin</emph>, <emph>tener</emph> meant +originally what was extended over a larger surface, then <emph>thin</emph>, then +<emph>delicate</emph>. The relationship betwixt <emph>tender</emph>, +<emph>thin</emph>, and <emph>thunder</emph> would be hard to establish if the +original conception of thunder had really been its +rumbling noise. +</p> + +<p> +Who does not imagine that he hears something sweet +in the French <emph>sucre</emph>, <emph>sucré</emph>? Yet sugar came from India, +and it is there called <emph>śarkhara</emph>, which is anything +<pb n='365'/><anchor id='Pg365'/> +but sweet sounding. This <emph>śarkhara</emph> is the same word +as <emph>sugar</emph>; it was called in Latin <emph>saccharum</emph>, and we +still speak of <emph>saccharine</emph> juice, which is sugar juice. +</p> + +<p> +In <emph>squirrel</emph> again some people imagine they hear +something of the rustling and whirling of the little +animal. But we have only to trace the name back +to Greek, and there we find that <emph>skiouros</emph> is composed +of two distinct words, the one meaning shade, the +other tail; the animal being called shade-tail by the +Greeks. +</p> + +<p> +Thus the word <emph>cat</emph>, the German <emph>katze</emph>, is supposed +to be an imitation of the sound made by a cat spitting. +But if the spitting were expressed by the sibilant, that +sibilant does not exist in the Latin <emph>catus</emph>, nor in <emph>cat</emph>, or +<emph>kitten</emph>, nor in the German <emph>kater</emph>.<note place='foot'>See +Pictet, Aryas Primitifs, p. 381.</note> The Sanskrit <emph>mârjâra</emph>, +cat, might seem to imitate the purring of the cat; +but it is derived from the root <emph>mṛij</emph>, to clean, <emph>mârjâra</emph>, +meaning the animal that always cleans itself. +</p> + +<p> +Many more instances might be given to show how +easily we are deceived by the constant connection of +certain sounds and certain meanings in the words of +our own language, and how readily we imagine that +there is something in the sound to tell us the meaning +of the words. <q>The sound must seem an echo to the +sense.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Most of these Onomatopoieias vanish as soon as we +trace our own names back to Anglo-Saxon and Gothic, +or compare them with their cognates in Greek, Latin, +or Sanskrit. The number of names which are really +formed by an imitation of sound dwindle down to a +very small quotum if cross-examined by the comparative +philologist, and we are left in the end with the +<pb n='366'/><anchor id='Pg366'/> +conviction that though <emph>a</emph> language might have been +made out of the roaring, fizzing, hissing, gobbling, +twittering, cracking, banging, slamming, and rattling +sounds of nature, the tongues with which <emph>we</emph> are acquainted +point to a different origin.<note place='foot'><p>In Chinese +the number of imitative sounds is very considerable. They +are mostly written phonetically, and followed by the determinative sign +<q>mouth.</q> We give a few, together with the corresponding sounds in +Mandshu. The difference between the two will show how differently the +same sounds strike different ears, and how differently they are rendered +into articulate language:— +</p> +<p> +The cock crows kiao kiao in Chinese, dchor dchor in Mandshu.<lb/> +The wild goose cries kao kao in Chinese, kôr kor in Mandshu.<lb/> +The wind and rain sound siao siao in Chinese, chor chor in Mandshu.<lb/> +Waggons sound lin lin in Chinese, koungour koungour in Mandshu.<lb/> +Dogs coupled together sound ling-ling in Chinese, kalang kalang in Mandshu.<lb/> +Chains coupled together sound tsiang-tsiang in Chinese, kiling kiling in Mandshu.<lb/> +Bells coupled together sound tsiang-tsiang in Chinese, tang tang in Mandshu.<lb/> +Drums coupled together sound ḱan ḱan in Chinese, tung tung in Mandshu. +</p></note> +</p> + +<p> +And so we find many philosophers, and among them +Condillac, protesting against a theory which would +place man even below the animal. Why should man +be supposed, they say, to have taken a lesson from +birds and beasts? Does he not utter cries, and sobs, +and shouts himself, according as he is affected by fear, +pain, or joy? These cries or interjections were represented +as the natural and real beginnings of human +speech. Everything else was supposed to have been +elaborated after their model. This is what I call the +Interjectional, or Pooh-pooh, Theory. +</p> + +<p> +Our answer to this theory is the same as to the +former. There are no doubt in every language interjections, +and some of them may become traditional, +and enter into the composition of words. But these +interjections are only the outskirts of real language. +Language begins where interjections end. There is +<pb n='367'/><anchor id='Pg367'/> +as much difference between a real word, such as <q>to +laugh,</q> and the interjection ha, ha! between <q>I suffer,</q> +and oh! as there is between the involuntary act +and noise of sneezing, and the verb <q>to sneeze.</q> We +sneeze, and cough, and scream, and laugh in the same +manner as animals, but if Epicurus tells us that we +speak in the same manner as dogs bark, moved by +nature,<note place='foot'>Ὁ γὰρ Ἐπίκουρος ἔλεγεν, ὅτι +οὑχὶ ἐπιστημόνως οὖτοι ἔθεντο τὰ ὀνόματα, +ἀλλὰ φυσικῶς κινούμενοι, ὡς οἱ βήσσοντες καὶ πταίροντες καὶ μυκώμενοι +καὶ ὐλακτοῦντες καὶ στενάζοντες.—Lersch, Sprach-philosophie der Alten, i. +40. The statement is taken from Proclus, and I doubt whether he represented +Epicurus rightly.</note> our own experience will tell us that this is +not the case. +</p> + +<p> +An excellent answer to the interjectional theory has +been given by Horne Tooke. +</p> + +<p> +<q>The dominion of speech,</q> he says,<note place='foot'>Diversions +of Purley, p. 32.</note> <q>is erected +upon the downfall of interjections. Without the artful +contrivances of language, mankind would have +had nothing but interjections with which to communicate, +orally, any of their feelings. The neighing of a +horse, the lowing of a cow, the barking of a dog, the +purring of a cat, sneezing, coughing, groaning, shrieking, +and every other involuntary convulsion with oral +sound, have almost as good a title to be called parts +of speech, as interjections have. Voluntary interjections +are only employed where the suddenness and +vehemence of some affection or passion returns men +to their natural state; and makes them for a moment +forget the use of speech; or when, from some circumstance, +the shortness of time will not permit them to +exercise it.</q> +</p> + +<p> +As in the case of Onomatopoieia, it cannot be denied +<pb n='368'/><anchor id='Pg368'/> +that with interjections, too, some kind of language +might have been formed; but not a language like that +which we find in numerous varieties among all the races +of men. One short interjection may be more powerful, +more to the point, more eloquent than a long speech. +In fact, interjections, together with gestures, the movements +of the muscles of the mouth, and the eye, would +be quite sufficient for all purposes which language answers +with the majority of mankind. Lucian, in his +treatise on dancing, mentions a king whose dominions +bordered on the Euxine. He happened to be at Rome +in the reign of Nero, and, having seen a pantomime +perform, begged him of the emperor as a present, in +order that he might employ him as an interpreter +among the nations in his neighborhood with whom he +could hold no intercourse on account of the diversity +of language. A pantomime meant a person who could +mimic everything, and there is hardly anything which +cannot be thus expressed. We, having language at +our command, have neglected the art of speaking without +words; but in the south of Europe that art is +still preserved. If it be true that one look may speak +volumes, it is clear that we might save ourselves +much of the trouble entailed by the use of discursive +speech. Yet we must not forget that <emph>hum!</emph> <emph>ugh!</emph> +<emph>tut!</emph> <emph>pooh!</emph> are as little to be called words as the expressive +gestures which usually accompany these exclamations. +</p> + +<p> +As to the attempts at deriving some of our words +etymologically from mere interjections, they are apt to +fail from the same kind of misconception which leads +us to imagine that there is something expressive in the +sounds of words. Thus it is said <q>that the idea of +<pb n='369'/><anchor id='Pg369'/> +disgust takes its rise in the senses of smell and taste, in +the first instance probably in smell alone; that in defending +ourselves from a bad smell we are instinctively +impelled to screw up the nose, and to expire strongly +through the compressed and protruded lips, giving rise +to a sound represented by the interjections faugh! foh! +fie! From this interjection it is proposed to derive, not +only such words as <emph>foul</emph> and <emph>filth</emph>, but, by transferring it +from natural to moral aversion, the English <emph>fiend</emph>, the +German <emph>Feind</emph>.</q> If this were true, we should suppose +that the expression of contempt was chiefly conveyed +by the aspirate f, by the strong emission of the breathing +with half-opened lips. But <emph>fiend</emph> is a participle from +a root <emph>fian</emph>, to hate; in Gothic <emph>fijan</emph>; and as a Gothic +aspirate always corresponds to a tenuis in Sanskrit, the +same root in Sanskrit would at once lose its expressive +power. It exists in fact in Sanskrit as <emph>pîy</emph>, to hate, to +destroy; just as <emph>friend</emph> is derived from a root which in +Sanskrit is <emph>prî</emph>, to delight.<note place='foot'><p>The +following list of Chinese interjections may be of interest:— +</p> +<p> +hu, to express surprise.<lb/> +fu, the same.<lb/> +tsai, to express admiration and approbation.<lb/> +i, to express distress.<lb/> +tsie, vocative particle.<lb/> +tsie tsie, exhortative particle.<lb/> +ài, to express contempt.<lb/> +ŭ-hu, to express pain.<lb/> +shin-ĭ, ah, indeed.<lb/> +pŭ sin, alas!<lb/> +ngo, stop! +</p> +<p> +In many cases interjections were originally words, just as the French <emph>hélas</emph> +is derived from <emph>lassus</emph>, tired, miserable. Diez, Lexicon Etymologicum, s. +v. <emph>lasso</emph>.</p></note> +</p> + +<p> +There is one more remark which I have to make +about the Interjectional and the Onomatopoëtic theories, +<pb n='370'/><anchor id='Pg370'/> +namely this: If the constituent elements of human +speech were either mere cries, or the mimicking of the +cries of nature, it would be difficult to understand why +brutes should be without language. There is not only +the parrot, but the mocking-bird and others, which can +imitate most successfully both articulate and inarticulate +sounds; and there is hardly an animal without the faculty +of uttering interjections, such as huff, hiss, baa, &c. +It is clear also that if what puts a perfect distinction +betwixt man and brutes is the having of general ideas, +language which arises from interjections and from the +imitation of the cries of animals could not claim to be +the outward sign of that distinctive faculty of man. +All words, in the beginning at least (and this is the +only point which interests us), would have been the +signs of individual impressions and individual perceptions, +and would only gradually have been adapted to +the expression of general ideas. +</p> + +<p> +The theory which is suggested to us by an analysis +of language carried out according to the principles of +comparative philology is the very opposite. We arrive +in the end at roots, and every one of these expresses a +general, not an individual, idea. Every name, if we +analyze it, contains a predicate by which the object to +which the name applies was known. +</p> + +<p> +There is an old controversy among philosophers, +whether language originated in general appellations, or +in proper names.<note place='foot'>Sir W. Hamilton's Lectures, +ii. p. 319.</note> It is the question of the <emph>primum +cognitum</emph>, and its consideration will help us perhaps in +discovering the true nature of the root, or the <emph>primum +appellatum</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +Some philosophers, among whom I may mention +<pb n='371'/><anchor id='Pg371'/> +Locke, Condillac, Adam Smith, Dr. Brown, and with +some qualification Dugald Stewart, maintain that all +terms, as at first employed, are expressive of individual +objects. I quote from Adam Smith. <q>The assignation,</q> +he says, <q>of particular names to denote particular +objects, that is, the institution of nouns substantive, +would probably be one of the first steps towards the +formation of language. Two savages who had never +been taught to speak, but had been bred up remote +from the societies of men, would naturally begin to +form that language by which they would endeavor to +make their mutual wants intelligible to each other by +uttering certain sounds whenever they meant to denote +certain objects. Those objects only which were most +familiar to them, and which they had most frequent +occasion to mention, would have particular names assigned +to them. The particular cave whose covering +sheltered them from the weather, the particular tree +whose fruit relieved their hunger, the particular fountain +whose water allayed their thirst, would first be denominated +by the words <emph>cave</emph>, <emph>tree</emph>, <emph>fountain</emph>, or by +whatever other appellations they might think proper, +in that primitive jargon, to mark them. Afterwards, +when the more enlarged experience of these savages +had led them to observe, and their necessary occasions +obliged them to make mention of, other caves, and other +trees, and other fountains, they would naturally bestow +upon each of those new objects the same name by which +they had been accustomed to express the similar object +they were first acquainted with. The new objects had +none of them any name of its own, but each of them +exactly resembled another object which had such an +appellation. It was impossible that those savages could +<pb n='372'/><anchor id='Pg372'/> +behold the new objects without recollecting the old +ones; and the name of the old ones, to which the new +bore so close a resemblance. When they had occasion, +therefore, to mention or to point out to each other any +of the new objects, they would naturally utter the name +of the correspondent old one, of which the idea could +not fail, at that instant, to present itself to their memory +in the strongest and liveliest manner. And thus +those words, which were originally the proper names +of individuals, became the common name of a multitude. +A child that is just learning to speak calls every +person who comes to the house its papa or its mamma; +and thus bestows upon the whole species those names +which it had been taught to apply to two individuals. +I have known a clown who did not know the proper +name of the river which ran by his own door. It was +<emph>the river</emph>, he said, and he never heard any other name +for it. His experience, it seems, had not led him to +observe any other river. The general word <emph>river</emph> therefore +was, it is evident, in his acceptance of it, a proper +name signifying an individual object. If this person +had been carried to another river, would he not readily +have called it <emph>a river</emph>? Could we suppose any person +living on the banks of the Thames so ignorant as not +to know the general word <emph>river</emph>, but to be acquainted +only with the particular word <emph>Thames</emph>, if he were +brought to any other river, would he not readily call +it a <emph>Thames</emph>? This, in reality, is no more than what +they who are well acquainted with the general word +are very apt to do. An Englishman, describing any +great river which he may have seen in some foreign +country, naturally says that it is another Thames.... +It is this application of the name of an individual +<pb n='373'/><anchor id='Pg373'/> +to a great multitude of objects, whose resemblance +naturally recalls the idea of that individual, and +of the name which expresses it, that seems originally +to have given occasion to the formation of those classes +and assortments which, in the schools, are called <emph>genera</emph> +and <emph>species</emph>.</q> +</p> + +<p> +This extract from Adam Smith will give a clear idea +of one view of the formation of thought and language. +I shall now read another extract, representing the diametrically +opposite view. It is taken from Leibniz,<note place='foot'>Nouveaux +Essais, lib. iii. c. i. p. 297 (Erdmann); Sir W. Hamilton, +Lectures, ii. 324.</note> +who maintains that general terms are necessary for the +essential constitution of languages. He likewise appeals +to children. <q>Children,</q> he says, <q>and those +who know but little of the language which they attempt +to speak, or little of the subject on which they would +employ it, make use of general terms, as <emph>thing</emph>, <emph>plant</emph>, +<emph>animal</emph>, instead of using proper names, of which they +are destitute. And it is certain that all proper or individual +names have been originally appellative or general.</q> +And again: <q>Thus I would make bold to +affirm that almost all words have been originally general +terms, because it would happen very rarely that +man would invent a name, expressly and without a +reason, to denote this or that individual. We may, +therefore, assert that the names of individual things +were names of species, which were given <emph>par excellence</emph>, +or otherwise, to some individual; as the name <emph>Great +Head</emph> to him of the whole town who had the largest, +or who was the man of the most consideration of the +great heads known.</q> +</p> + +<p> +It might seem presumptuous to attempt to arbitrate +<pb n='374'/><anchor id='Pg374'/> +between such men as Leibniz and Adam Smith, particularly +when both speak so positively as they do on +this subject. But there are two ways of judging of +former philosophers. One is to put aside their opinions +as simply erroneous where they differ from our own. +This is the least satisfactory way of studying ancient +philosophy. Another way is to try to enter fully into +the opinions of those from whom we differ, to make +them, for a time at least, our own, till at last we discover +the point of view from which each philosopher +looked at the facts before him, and catch the light in +which he regarded them. We shall then find that +there is much less of downright error in the history +of philosophy than is commonly supposed; nay, we +shall find nothing so conducive to a right appreciation +of truth as a right appreciation of the error by which +it is surrounded. +</p> + +<p> +Now, in the case before us, Adam Smith is no doubt +right, when he says that the first individual cave which +is called cave gave the name to all other caves. In the +same manner, the first <emph>town</emph>, though a mere enclosure, +gave the name to all other towns; the first imperial residence +on the Palatine hill gave the name to all palaces. +Slight differences between caves, towns, or palaces are +readily passed by, and the first name becomes more +and more general with every new individual to which +it is applied. So far Adam Smith is right, and the +history of almost every substantive might be cited in +support of his view. But Leibniz is equally right +when, in looking beyond the first emergence of such +names as cave or town or palace, he asks how such +names could have arisen. Let us take the Latin names +of cave. A cave in Latin is called <emph>antrum</emph>, +<emph>cavea</emph>, <emph>spelunca</emph>. +<pb n='375'/><anchor id='Pg375'/> +Now <emph>antrum</emph> means really the same as <emph>internum</emph>. +<emph>Antar</emph> in Sanskrit means <emph>between</emph> and +<emph>within</emph>.<note place='foot'>Pott, Etymologische Forschungen, p. 324, +<hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi></note> <emph>Antrum</emph>, +therefore, meant originally what is within or inside the +earth or anything else. It is clear, therefore, that such +a name could not have been given to any individual +cave, unless the general idea of being within, or inwardness, +had been present in the mind. This general +idea once formed, and once expressed by the pronominal +root <emph>an</emph> or <emph>antar</emph>, the process of naming is clear and +intelligible. The place where the savage could live +safe from rain and from the sudden attacks of wild +beasts, a natural hollow in the rock, he would call his +<emph>within</emph>, his <emph>antrum</emph>; and afterwards similar places, +whether dug in the earth or cut in a tree, would be +designated by the same name. The same general +idea, however, would likewise supply other names, +and thus we find that the <emph>entrails</emph> were called <emph>antra</emph> +(neuter) in Sanskrit, <emph>enteron</emph> in Greek, originally +things within. +</p> + +<p> +Let us take another word for cave, which is <emph>căvea</emph> or +<emph>căverna</emph>. Here again Adam Smith would be perfectly +right in maintaining that this name, when first given, +was applied to one particular cave, and was afterwards +extended to other caves. But Leibniz would be equally +right in maintaining that in order to call even the first +hollow <emph>cavea</emph>, it was necessary that the general idea of +<emph>hollow</emph> should have been formed in the mind, and should +have received its vocal expression <emph>cav</emph>. Nay we may +go a step beyond, for <emph>cavus</emph>, or hollow, is a secondary, +not a primary, idea. Before a cave was called <emph>cavea</emph>, a +hollow thing, many things hollow had passed before the +eyes of men. Why then was a hollow thing, or a hole, +<pb n='376'/><anchor id='Pg376'/> +called by the root <emph>cav</emph>? Because what had been hollowed +out was intended at first as a place of safety and +protection, as a cover; and it was called therefore by +the root <emph>ku</emph> or <emph>sku</emph>, which conveyed the idea of +to cover.<note place='foot'>Benfey, Griech. Wurzel Lex. p. 611. From <emph>sku</emph> or +<emph>ku</emph>, σκῦτος, skin; +<emph>cŭtis</emph>, <emph>haut</emph>.</note> +Hence the general idea of covering existed in the mind +before it was applied to hiding-places in rocks or trees, +and it was not till an expression had thus been framed +for things hollow or safe in general, that caves in particular +could be designated by the name of <emph>cavea</emph> or +hollows. +</p> + +<p> +Another form for <emph>cavus</emph> was <emph>koilos</emph>, hollow. The +conception was originally the same; a hole was called +<emph>koilon</emph> because it served as a cover. But once so used +<emph>koilon</emph> came to mean a cave, a vaulted cave, a vault, +and thus the heaven was called <emph>cœlum</emph>, the modern <emph>ciel</emph>, +because it was looked upon as a vault or cover for the +earth. +</p> + +<p> +It is the same with all nouns. They all express +originally one out of the many attributes of a thing, +and that attribute, whether it be a quality or an action, +is necessarily a general idea. The word thus formed +was in the first instance intended for one object only, +though of course it was almost immediately extended +to the whole class to which this object seemed to +belong. When a word such as <emph>rivus</emph>, river, was first +formed, no doubt it was intended for a certain river, and that +river was called <emph>rivus</emph>, from a root <emph>ru</emph> or <emph>sru</emph>, +to run, because of its running water. In many instances +a word meaning river or runner remained the +proper name of one river, without ever rising to the +dignity of an appellative. Thus <emph>Rhenus</emph>, the Rhine, +<pb n='377'/><anchor id='Pg377'/> +means river or runner, but it clung to one river, and +could not be used as an appellative for others. The +Ganges is the Sanskrit <emph>Gangâ</emph>, literally the Go-go; a +word very well adapted for any majestic river, but +in Sanskrit restricted to the one sacred stream. The +Indus again is the Sanskrit <emph>Sindhu</emph>, and means the irrigator, +from <emph>syand</emph>, to sprinkle. In this case, however, +the proper name was not checked in its growth, but +was used likewise as an appelative for any great stream. +</p> + +<p> +We have thus seen how the controversy about the +<emph>primum cognitum</emph> assumes a new and perfectly clear +aspect. The first thing really known is the general. +It is through it that we know and name afterwards +individual objects of which any general idea can be +predicated, and it is only in the third stage that these +individual objects, thus known and named, become +again the representatives of whole classes, and their +names or proper names are raised into appellatives.<note place='foot'>Sir +William Hamilton (Lectures on Metaphysics, ii. p. 327) holds a +view intermediate between those of Adam Smith and Leibniz. <q>As our +knowledge,</q> he says, <q>proceeds from the confused to the distinct, from +the vague to the determinate, so, in the mouths of children, language at +first expresses neither the precisely general nor the determinately individual, +but the vague and confused, and out of this the universal is elaborated +by generification, the particular and singular by specification and +individualisation.</q> Some further remarks on this point in the Literary +Gazette, 1861, p. 173.</note> +</p> + +<p> +There is a petrified philosophy in language, and if +we examine the most ancient word for name we find it is +<emph>nâman</emph> in Sanskrit, <emph>nomen</emph> in Latin, <emph>namo</emph> in Gothic. +This <emph>nâman</emph> stands for <emph>gnâman</emph>, which is preserved in +the Latin <emph>co-gnomen</emph>. The <emph>g</emph> is dropped as in <emph>natus</emph>, +son, for <emph>gnatus</emph>. <emph>Nâman</emph>, therefore, and name are +derived from the root gnâ, to know, and meant originally +that by which we know a thing. +</p> + +<pb n='378'/><anchor id='Pg378'/> + +<p> +And how do we know things? We perceive things +by our senses, but our senses convey to us information +about single things only. But to <emph>know</emph> is more than to +feel, than to perceive, more than to remember, more +than to compare. No doubt words are much abused. +We speak of a dog <emph>knowing</emph> his master, of an infant +<emph>knowing</emph> his mother. In such expressions, to know +means to recognize. But to know a thing, means +more than to recognize it. We know a thing if we +are able to bring it, and any part of it, under more +general ideas. We then say, not that we have a perception, +but a conception, or that we have a general +idea of a thing. The facts of nature are perceived by +our senses; the thoughts of nature, to borrow an expression +of Oersted's, can be conceived by our reason +only.<note place='foot'><q>We receive the impression of the falling of a large mass of +water, descending always from the same height and with the same difficulty. +The scattering of the drops of water, the formation of froth, the sound of +the fall by the roaring and by the froth, are constantly produced by the +same causes, and, consequently, are always the same. The impression +which all this produces on us is no doubt at first felt as multiform, but it +soon forms a whole, or, in other terms, we feel all the diversity of the isolated +impressions as the work of a great physical activity which results +from the particular nature of the spot. We may, perhaps, till we are better +informed, call all that is fixed in the phenomenon, <emph>the thoughts of +nature</emph>.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Oersted, +Esprit dans la Nature</hi>, p. 152.</note> Now the first step towards this real knowledge, +a step which, however small in appearance, separates +man forever from all other animals, is the <emph>naming of a +thing</emph>, or the making a thing knowable. All naming +is classification, bringing the individual under the general; +and whatever we know, whether empirically or +scientifically, we know it only by means of our general +ideas. Other animals have sensation, perception, +memory, and, in a certain sense, intellect; but all +<pb n='379'/><anchor id='Pg379'/> +these, in the animal, are conversant with single objects +only. Man has sensation, perception, memory, intellect, +and reason, and it is his reason only that is conversant +with general ideas.<note place='foot'><q>Ce qui trompe l'homme, +c'est qu'il voit faire aux bêtes plusieurs des +choses qu'il fait, et qu'il ne voit pas que, dans ces choses-là même, les bêtes +ne mettent qu'une intelligence grossière, bornée, et qu'il met, lui, une +intelligence <emph>doublée d'esprit</emph>.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Flourens, +De la Raison</hi>, p. 73.</note> +</p> + +<p> +Through reason we not only stand a step above the +brute creation: we belong to a different world. We +look down on our merely animal experience, on our +sensations, perceptions, our memory, and our intellect, +as something belonging to us, but not as constituting +our most inward and eternal self. Our senses, our +memory, our intellect, are like the lenses of a telescope. +But there is an eye that looks through them at the +realities of the outer world, our own rational and self-conscious +soul; a power as distinct from our perceptive +faculties as the sun is from the earth which it fills +with light, and warmth, and life. +</p> + +<p> +At the very point where man parts company with +the brute world, at the first flash of reason as the +manifestation of the light within us, there we see the +true genesis of language. Analyze any word you like, +and you will find that it expresses a general idea peculiar +to the individual to which the name belongs. What +is the meaning of moon?—the measurer. What is the +meaning of sun?—the begetter. What is the meaning +of earth?—the ploughed. The old name given to +animals, such as cows and sheep, was <emph>pasú</emph>, the Latin +<emph>pecus</emph>, which means <emph>feeders</emph>. <emph>Animal</emph> itself is a +later name, and derived from <emph>anima</emph>, soul. This <emph>anima</emph> again +meant originally blowing or breathing, like spirit from +<pb n='380'/><anchor id='Pg380'/> +<emph>spirare</emph>, and was derived from a root, <emph>an</emph>, to blow, +which gives us <emph>anila</emph>, wind, in Sanskrit, and <emph>anemos</emph>, +wind, in Greek. <emph>Ghost</emph>, the German <emph>Geist</emph>, is based on +the same conception. It is connected with <emph>gust</emph>, with +<emph>yeast</emph>, and even with the hissing and boiling <emph>geysers</emph> of +Iceland. <emph>Soul</emph> is the Gothic <emph>saivala</emph>, and this is clearly +related to another Gothic word, <emph>saivs</emph>,<note place='foot'>See Heyse, +System der Sprachwissenschaft, s. 97.</note> which means +the sea. The sea was called <emph>saivs</emph> from a root <emph>si</emph> or +<emph>siv</emph>, the Greek <emph>seiō</emph>, to shake; it meant the tossed-about +water, in contradistinction to stagnant or running +water. The soul being called <emph>saivala</emph>, we see +that it was originally conceived by the Teutonic nations +as a sea within, heaving up and down with every +breath, and reflecting heaven and earth on the mirror +of the deep. +</p> + +<p> +The Sanskrit name for love is <emph>smara</emph>; it is derived +from <emph>smar</emph>, to recollect; and the same root has supplied +the German <emph>schmerz</emph>, pain, and the English <emph>smart</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +If the serpent is called in Sanskrit <emph>sarpa</emph>, it is +because it was conceived under the general idea of +creeping, an idea expressed by the word <emph>srip</emph>. But the +serpent was also called <emph>ahi</emph> in Sanskrit, in Greek <emph>echis</emph> +or <emph>echidna</emph>, in Latin <emph>anguis</emph>. This name is derived +from quite a different root and idea. The root is <emph>ah</emph> +in Sanskrit, or <emph>anh</emph>, which means to press together, to +choke, to throttle. Here the distinguishing mark +from which the serpent was named was his throttling, +and <emph>ahi</emph> meant serpent, as expressing the general idea +of throttler. It is a curious root this <emph>anh</emph>, and it still +lives in several modern words. In Latin it appears as +<emph>ango</emph>, <emph>anxi</emph>, <emph>anctum</emph>, to strangle, in +<emph>angina</emph>, quinsy,<note place='foot'>The word <emph>quinsy</emph>, +as was pointed out to me, offers a striking illustration +of the ravages produced by phonetic decay. The root <emph>anh</emph> has here completely +vanished. But it was there originally, for <emph>quinsy</emph> is the Greek +κυνάγχη, dog-throttling. See Richardson's Dictionary, s. v. quinancy.</note> in +<pb n='381'/><anchor id='Pg381'/> +<emph>angor</emph>, suffocation. But <emph>angor</emph> meant not only quinsy +or compression of the neck; it assumed a moral import +and signifies anguish or anxiety. The two adjectives +<emph>angustus</emph>, narrow, and <emph>anxius</emph>, uneasy, both come from +the same source. In Greek the root retained its natural +and material meaning; in <emph>eggys</emph>, near, and <emph>echis</emph>, +serpent, throttler. But in Sanskrit it was chosen with +great truth as the proper name of sin. Evil no doubt +presented itself under various aspects to the human +mind, and its names are many; but none so expressive +as those derived from our root, <emph>anh</emph>, to throttle. <emph>Anhas</emph> +in Sanskrit means sin, but it does so only because it +meant originally throttling,—the consciousness of sin +being like the grasp of the assassin on the throat of his +victim. All who have seen and contemplated the +statue of Laokoon and his sons, with the serpent +coiled round them from head to foot, may realize +what those ancients felt and saw when they called sin +<emph>anhas</emph>, or the throttler. This <emph>anhas</emph> is the same word +as the Greek <emph>agos</emph>, sin. In Gothic the same root has +produced <emph>agis</emph>, in the sense of <emph>fear</emph>, and from the same +source we have <emph>awe</emph>, in awful, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> fearful, and +<emph>ug</emph>, in <emph>ugly</emph>. The English <emph>anguish</emph> is +from the French <emph>angoisse</emph>, +the Italian <emph>angoscia</emph>, a corruption of the Latin +<emph>angustiæ</emph>, a strait. +</p> + +<p> +And how did those early thinkers and framers of +language distinguish between man and the other animals? +What general idea did they connect with the +first conception of themselves? The Latin word <emph>homo</emph>, +the French <emph>l'homme</emph>, which has been reduced to <emph>on</emph> in +<pb n='382'/><anchor id='Pg382'/> +<emph>on dit</emph>, is derived from the same root which we have in +<emph>humus</emph>, the soil, <emph>humilis</emph>, humble. <emph>Homo</emph>, therefore, +would express the idea of a being made of the dust +of the earth.<note place='foot'>Greek χαμαί, Zend <emph>zem</emph>, Lithuanian +<emph>zeme</emph>, and <emph>źmenes</emph>, <emph>homines</emph>. See +Bopp, Glossarium Sanscritum, s. v.</note> +</p> + +<p> +Another ancient word for man was the Sanskrit +<emph>marta</emph>,<note place='foot'>See Windischmann, Fortschritt der +Sprachenkunde, p. 23.</note> the Greek <emph>brotos</emph>, +the Latin <emph>mortalis</emph> (a secondary +derivative), our own <emph>mortal</emph>. <emph>Marta</emph> means <q>he +who dies,</q> and it is remarkable that where everything +else was changing, fading, and dying, this should have +been chosen as the distinguishing name for man. +Those early poets would hardly have called themselves +mortals unless they had believed in other beings as +immortal. +</p> + +<p> +There is a third name for man which means simply +the thinker, and this, the true title of our race, still +lives in the name of <emph>man</emph>. <emph>Mâ</emph> in Sanskrit means to +measure, from which you remember we had the name +of moon. <emph>Man</emph>, a derivative root, means to think. +From this we have the Sanskrit <emph>manu</emph>, originally +thinker, then man. In the later Sanskrit we find +derivatives, such as <emph>mânava</emph>, <emph>mânusha</emph>, <emph>manushya</emph>, all +expressing man. In Gothic we find both <emph>man</emph>, and +<emph>mannisks</emph>, the modern German <emph>mann</emph> and <emph>mensch</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +There were many more names for man, as there were +many names for all things in ancient languages. Any +feature that struck the observing mind as peculiarly +characteristic could be made to furnish a new name. +The sun might be called the bright, the warm, the golden, +the preserver, the destroyer, the wolf, the lion, the +heavenly eye, the father of light and life. Hence that +<pb n='383'/><anchor id='Pg383'/> +superabundance of synonymes in ancient dialects, and +hence that <emph>struggle for life</emph> carried on among these words, +which led to the destruction of the less strong, the less +happy, the less fertile words, and ended in the triumph +of <emph>one</emph>, as the recognized and proper name for every +object in every language. On a very small scale this +process of <emph>natural selection</emph>, or, as it would better be +called, <emph>elimination</emph>, may still be watched even in modern +languages, that is to say, even in languages so old and +full of years as English and French. What it was at the +first burst of dialects we can only gather from such isolated +cases as when Vón Hammer counts 5744 words +relating to the camel.<note place='foot'>Farrar, Origin of Language, p. 85.</note> +</p> + +<p> +The fact that every word is originally a predicate, +that names, though signs of individual conceptions, are +all, without exception, derived from general ideas, is one +of the most important discoveries in the science of language. +It was known before that language is the distinguishing +characteristic of man; it was known also +that the having of general ideas is that which puts a +perfect distinction betwixt man and brutes; but that +these two were only different expressions of the same +fact was not known till the theory of roots had been +established as preferable to the theories both of Onomatopoieia +and of Interjections. But, though our +modern philosophy did not know it, the ancient poets +and framers of language must have known it. For in +Greek language is <emph>logos</emph>, but <emph>logos</emph> means also reason, +and <emph>alogon</emph> was chosen as the name, and the most +proper name, for brute. No animal thinks, and no +animal speaks, except man. Language and thought +are inseparable. Words without thought are dead +<pb n='384'/><anchor id='Pg384'/> +sounds; thoughts without words are nothing. To +think is to speak low; to speak is to think aloud. +The word is the thought incarnate. +</p> + +<p> +And now I am afraid I have but a few minutes left to +explain the last question of all in our science, namely—How +can sound express thought? How did roots +become the signs of general ideas? How was the abstract +idea of measuring expressed by <emph>mâ</emph>, the idea of +thinking by <emph>man</emph>? How did <emph>gâ</emph> come to mean going, +<emph>sthâ</emph> standing, <emph>sad</emph> sitting, <emph>dâ</emph> giving, +<emph>mar</emph> dying, <emph>char</emph> +walking, <emph>kar</emph> doing? +</p> + +<p> +I shall try to answer as briefly as possible. The 400 +or 500 roots which remain as the constituent elements +in different families of language are not interjections, +nor are they imitations. They are <emph>phonetic types</emph> produced +by a power inherent in human nature. They +exist, as Plato would say, by nature; though with +Plato we should add that, when we say by nature, we +mean by the hand of God.<note place='foot'>Θήσω τὰ +μὲν φύσει λεγόμενα ποιεῖσθαι θείᾳ τέχνη.</note> There is a law which +runs through nearly the whole of nature, that everything +which is struck rings. Each substance has its +peculiar ring. We can tell the more or less perfect +structure of metals by their vibrations, by the answer +which they give. Gold rings differently from tin, wood +rings differently from stone; and different sounds are +produced according to the nature of each percussion. +It was the same with man, the most highly organized +of nature's works.<note place='foot'>This view +was propounded many years ago by Professor Heyse in the +lectures which he gave at Berlin, and which have been very carefully published +since his death by one of his pupils, Dr. Steinthal. The fact that +wood, metals, cords, &c., if struck, vibrate and ring, can, of course, be used +as an illustration only, and not as an explanation. The faculty peculiar to +man, in his primitive state, by which every impression from without received +its vocal expression from within, must be accepted as an ultimate +fact. That faculty must have existed in man, because its effects continue +to exist. Analogies from the inanimate world, however, are useful, and +deserve farther examination.</note> Man, in his primitive and perfect +<pb n='385'/><anchor id='Pg385'/> +state, was not only endowed, like the brute, with the +power of expressing his sensations by interjections, and +his perceptions by onomatopoieia. He possessed likewise +the faculty of giving more articulate expression to +the rational conceptions of his mind. That faculty +was not of his own making. It was an instinct, an +instinct of the mind as irresistible as any other instinct. +So far as language is the production of that instinct, it +belongs to the realm of nature. Man loses his instincts +as he ceases to want them. His senses become fainter +when, as in the case of scent, they become useless. +Thus the creative faculty which gave to each conception, +as it thrilled for the first time through the brain, +a phonetic expression, became extinct when its object +was fulfilled. The number of these <emph>phonetic types</emph> must +have been almost infinite in the beginning, and it was +only through the same process of <emph>natural elimination</emph> +which we observed in the early history of words, that +clusters of roots, more or less synonymous, were gradually +reduced to one definite type. Instead of deriving +language from nine roots, like Dr. Murray,<note place='foot'>Dr. Murray's +primitive roots were, ag, bag, dwag, cwag, lag, mag, nag, +rag, swag.</note> or from +<emph>one</emph> root, a feat actually accomplished by a Dr. +Schmidt,<note place='foot'>Curtius, Griechische Etymologie, p. 13. Dr. Schmidt derives all +Greek words from the root <emph>e</emph>, and all Latin +words from the arch-radical <emph>hi</emph>.</note> +we must suppose that the first settlement of the radical +elements of language was preceded by a period of unrestrained +growth,—the spring of speech—to be followed +by many an autumn. +</p> + +<pb n='386'/><anchor id='Pg386'/> + +<p> +With the process of elimination, or natural selection, +the historical element enters into the science of +language. However primitive the Chinese may be +as compared with terminational and inflectional languages, +its roots or words have clearly passed through +a long process of mutual attrition. There are many +things of a merely traditional character even in Chinese. +The rule that in a simple sentence the first word is the +subject, the second the verb, the third the object, is a +traditional rule. It is by tradition only that <emph>ngŏ ģin</emph>, +in Chinese, means a bad man, whereas <emph>ģin ngŏ</emph> signifies +man is bad. The Chinese themselves distinguish between +<emph>full</emph> and <emph>empty</emph> roots,<note place='foot'>Endlicher, +Chinesische Grammatik, p. 163.</note> the former being predicative, +the latter corresponding to our particles which +modify the meaning of full roots and determine their +relation to each other. It is only by tradition that +roots become empty. All roots were originally full +whether predicative or demonstrative, and the fact that +empty roots in Chinese cannot always be traced back +to their full prototypes shows that even the most ancient +Chinese had passed through successive periods of +growth. Chinese commentators admit that all empty +words were originally full words, just as Sanskrit grammarians +maintain that all that is found in grammar was +originally substantial. But we must be satisfied with +but partial proofs of this general principle, and must be +prepared to find as many fanciful derivations in Chinese +as in Sanskrit. The fact, again, that all roots in Chinese +are no longer capable of being employed at pleasure, +either as substantives, or verbs, or adjectives, is +another proof that, even in this most primitive stage, +language points back to a previous growth. <emph>Fu</emph> is father, +<pb n='387'/><anchor id='Pg387'/> +<emph>mu</emph> is mother; <emph>fu mu</emph> parents; but neither <emph>fu</emph> nor +<emph>mu</emph> is used as a root in its original predicative sense. +The amplest proof, however, of the various stages +through which even so simple a language as Chinese +must have passed is to be found in the comparatively +small number of roots, and in the definite meanings +attached to each; a result which could only have been +obtained by that constant struggle which has been so +well described in natural history as the struggle for life. +</p> + +<p> +But although this sifting of roots, and still more the +subsequent combination of roots, cannot be ascribed to +the mere working of nature or natural instincts, it is +still less, as we saw in a former Lecture, the effect of +deliberate or premeditated art, in the sense in which, +for instance, a picture of Raphael or a symphony of +Beethoven is. Given a root to express flying, or bird, +and another to express heap, then the joining together +of the two to express many birds, or birds in the plural, +is the natural effect of the synthetic power of the human +mind, or, to use more homely language, of the +power of putting two and two together. Some philosophers +maintain indeed that this explains nothing, +and that the real mystery to be solved is how the mind +can form a synthesis, or conceive many things as one. +Into those depths we cannot follow. Other philosophers +imagine that the combination of roots to form +agglutinative and inflectional language is, like the first +formation of roots, the result of a natural instinct. +Thus Professor Heyse<note place='foot'>System der +Sprachwissenschaft, p. 16.</note> maintained that <q>the various +forms of development in language must be explained +by the philosophers as <emph>necessary</emph> evolutions, founded in +the very essence of human speech.</q> This is not the +<pb n='388'/><anchor id='Pg388'/> +case. We can watch the growth of language, and we +can understand and explain all that is the result of that +growth. But we cannot undertake to prove that all +that is in language is so by necessity, and could not +have been otherwise. When we have, as in Chinese, +two such words as <emph>kiai</emph> and <emph>tu</emph>, both expressing a heap, +an assembly, a quantity, then we may perfectly understand +why either the one or the other should have been +used to form the plural. But if one of the two becomes +fixed and traditional, while the other becomes obsolete, +then we can register the fact as historical, but no +philosophy on earth will explain its absolute necessity. +We can perfectly understand how, with two such roots +as <emph>kûŏ</emph>, empire, and <emph>ćung</emph>, middle, the Chinese should +have formed what we call a locative, <emph>kŭŏ ćung</emph>, in the +empire. But to say that this was the only way to express +this conception is an assertion contradicted both +by fact and reason. We saw the various ways in which +the future can be formed. They are all equally intelligible +and equally possible, but not one of them is +inevitable. In Chinese <emph>ỳaó</emph> means to will, <emph>ngò</emph> is I; +hence <emph>ngò ỳaó</emph>, I will. The same root <emph>ỳaó</emph>, added to +<emph>ḱiú</emph>, to go, gives us <emph>ngò ỳaó ḱiú</emph>, I will go, the first +germ of our futures. To say that <emph>ngò ỳaó ḱiú</emph> was the +necessary form of the future in Chinese would introduce +a fatalism into language which rests on no authority +whatever. The building up of language is not like +the building of the cells in a beehive, nor is it like the +building of St. Peter's by Michael Angelo. It is the +result of innumerable agencies, working each according +to certain laws, and leaving in the end the result of +their combined efforts freed from all that proved superfluous +or useless. From the first combination of two +<pb n='389'/><anchor id='Pg389'/> +such words as <emph>ģin</emph>, man, <emph>kiai</emph>, many, to form the plural +<emph>ģin kiai</emph>, to the perfect grammar of Sanskrit and Greek, +everything is intelligible as the result of the two principles +of growth which we considered in our second +Lecture. What is antecedent to the production of +roots is the work of nature; what follows after is the +work of man, not in his individual and free, but in his +collective and moderating, capacity. +</p> + +<p> +I do not say that every form in Greek or Sanskrit +has as yet been analyzed and explained. There are +formations in Greek and Latin and English which +have hitherto baffled all tests; and there are certain +contrivances, such as the augment in Greek, the change +of vowels in Hebrew, the Umlaut and Ablaut in the +Teutonic dialects, where we might feel inclined to +suppose that language admitted distinctions purely +musical or phonetic, corresponding to very palpable +and material distinctions of thought. Such a supposition, +however, is not founded on any safe induction. +It may seem inexplicable to us why <emph>bruder</emph> in +German should form its plural as <emph>brüder</emph>; or <emph>brother</emph>, +<emph>brethren</emph>. But what is inexplicable and apparently +artificial in our modern languages becomes intelligible +in their more ancient phases. The change of <emph>u</emph> into +<emph>ü</emph>, as in <emph>bruder</emph>, <emph>brüder</emph>, was not intentional; least +of all was it introduced to expressed plurality. The +change is phonetic, and due to the influence of an +<emph>i</emph> or <emph>j</emph>,<note place='foot'>See Schleicher, +Deutsche Sprache, p. 144.</note> which existed originally in the last syllable +and which reacted regularly on the vowel of the +preceding syllable; nay, which leaves its effect behind, +even after it has itself disappeared. By a +false analogy such a change, perfectly justifiable in a +<pb n='390'/><anchor id='Pg390'/> +certain class of words, may be applied to other words +where no such change was called for; and it may +then appear as if an arbitrary change of vowels was +intended to convey a grammatical change. But even +into these recesses the comparative philologist can follow +language, thus discovering a reason even for what +in reality was irrational and wrong. It seems difficult +to believe that the augment in Greek should originally +have had an independent substantial existence, yet all +analogy is in favor of such a view. Suppose English +had never been written down before Wycliffe's time, +we should then find that in some instances the perfect +was formed by the mere addition of a short <emph>a</emph>. Wycliffe +spoke and wrote:<note place='foot'>Marsh, p. 388.</note> +<emph>I knowlech to a felid and seid +þus</emph>; <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> I acknowledge to have felt and said thus. +In a similar way we read: <emph>it should a fallen</emph>; instead +of <q>it should have fallen;</q> and in some parts of +England common people still say very much the same: +<emph>I should a done it</emph>. Now in some old English books +this <emph>a</emph> actually coalesces with the verb, at least they +are printed together; so that a grammar founded on +them would give us <q>to fall</q> as the infinitive of the +present, <emph>to afallen</emph> as the infinitive of the past. I do +not wish for a moment to be understood as if there was +any connection between this <emph>a</emph>, a contraction of <emph>have</emph> in +English, and the Greek augment which is placed before +past tenses. All I mean is, that, if the origin of the +augment has not yet been satisfactorily explained, we +are not therefore to despair, or to admit an arbitrary +addition of a consonant or vowel, used as it were algebraically +or by mutual agreement, to distinguish a +past from a present tense. +</p> + +<pb n='391'/><anchor id='Pg391'/> + +<p> +If inductive reasoning is worth anything, we are +justified in believing that what has been proved to +be true on so large a scale, and in cases where it was +least expected, is true with regard to language in general. +We require no supernatural interference, nor any +conclave of ancient sages, to explain the realities of +human speech. All that is formal in language is the +result of rational combination; all that is material, +the result of a mental instinct. The first natural and +instinctive utterances, if sifted differently by different +clans, would fully account both for the first origin and +for the first divergence of human speech. We can understand +not only the origin of language, but likewise +the necessary breaking up of one language into many; +and we perceive that no amount of variety in the material +or the formal elements of speech is incompatible +with the admission of one common source. +</p> + +<p> +The Science of Language thus leads us up to that +highest summit from whence we see into the very dawn +of man's life on earth; and where the words which we +have heard so often from the days of our childhood—<q>And +the whole earth was of one language and of one +speech</q>—assume a meaning more natural, more intelligible, +more convincing, than they ever had before. +</p> + +<milestone unit='tb' rend='rule: 50%'/> + +<p> +And now in concluding this course of Lectures, I +have only to express my regret that the sketch of the +Science of Language which I endeavored to place before +you, was necessarily so very slight and imperfect. +There are many points which I could not touch at all, +many which I could only allude to: there is hardly +one to which I could do full justice. Still I feel grateful +to the President and the Council of this Institution +<pb n='392'/><anchor id='Pg392'/> +for having given me an opportunity of claiming some +share of public sympathy for a science which I believe +has a great future in store; and I shall be pleased, if, +among those who have done me the honor of attending +these Lectures, I have excited, though I could not have +satisfied, some curiosity as to the strata which underlie +the language on which we stand and walk; and as to +the elements which enter into the composition of the +very granite of our thoughts. +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='394'/><anchor id='Pg394'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Appendix.</head> + +<p> +[Transcriber's Note: The Appendix contains genealogical tables of the language +families. In the original, they were displayed as wide landscape pages, +which could not be rendered effectively in e-book format. The information in them +has been reproduced here in textual paragraphs.] +</p> + +<p> +No. 1. Genealogical Table of the Aryan Family of Languages. +</p> + +<p> +The Aryan Family consists of two Divisions: The Southern Division, and the +Norther Division. +</p> + +<p> +The Southern Division consists of two Classes: the Indic and Iranic. +</p> + +<p> +The Indic Class consists of the dead languages Prakrit and Pali, +Modern Sanskrit, and Vedic Sanskrit, and the modern Dialects of India, and +the Dialects of the Gipsies. +</p> + +<p> +The Iranic Class consists of the dead languages Parsi, Pehlevi, Cuneiform Inscriptions, +Zend, and Old Armenian; the the living languages of Persia, Afghanistan, +Kurdistan, Bokhara, Armenia, and Ossethi. +</p> + +<p> +The Northern Division consists of six Classes: Celtic, Italic, Illyric, Hellenic, +Windic, and Teutonic. +</p> + +<p> +The Celtic Class consists of two Branches: Cymric and Gadhelic. +</p> + +<p> +The Cymric Branch consists of the dead language Cornish, and the living languages +of Wales and Brittany. +</p> + +<p> +The Gadhelic Branch consists of the living languages of Scotland, Ireland, and Man. +</p> + +<p> +The Italic Class consists of the dead languages Oscan, Latin, and Umbrian, +together called Lingua Vulgaris, or Langue d'oc and Langue d'oil, +and the living languages of Portugal, Spain, Provençe, France, and Italy. +</p> + +<p> +The Illyric Class consists of the living languages of Wallachia, the Grisons, +and Albania. +</p> + +<p> +The Hellenic Class consists of the dead Κοινή languages, Doric, Æolic, +Attic, and Ionic, and the living language of Greece. +</p> + +<p> +The Windic Class consists of three Branches: Lettic, South-East Slavonic, +and West Slavonic. +</p> + +<pb n='395'/><anchor id='Pg395'/> + +<p> +The Lettic Branch consists of the dead language Old Prussian, and the living +languages of Lithuania, Kurland and Livonia (Lettish). +</p> + +<p> +The South-East Slavonic Branch consists of the dead language Ecclesiastical +Slavonic, and the living languages of Bulgaria, Russia (Great, Little, +White Russian), Illyria (Slovenian, Croatian, Servian). +</p> + +<p> +The West Slavonic Branch consists of the dead languages Old Bohemian and +Pelabian, and the living languages of Poland, Bohemian (Slovakian), +and Lusatia. +</p> + +<p> +The Teutonic Class consists of three branches: High-German, Low-German, +and Scandinavian. +</p> + +<p> +The High-German Branch consists of the dead languages Middle High-German +Old High-German, and the living language of Germany. +</p> + +<p> +The Low-German Branch consists of the dead languages Gothic, Anglo-Saxon, Old +Dutch, Old Friesian, and Old Saxon, and the living languages of England, Holland, +Friesland, and North of Germany (Platt-Deutsch). +</p> + +<p> +The Scandinavian Branch consists of the dead language Old Norse, and the +living languages of Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and Iceland. +</p> + +<pb n='396'/><anchor id='Pg396'/> + +<p> +No. 2. Genealogical Table of the Semitic Family of Languages. +</p> + +<p> +The Semitic Family Family consists of three Classes: the Arabic or Southern, +the Hebraic or Middle, and the Aramaic or Northern. +</p> + +<p> +The Arabic or Southern Class consists of the dead languages Ethiopic and the +Himyaritic Inscriptions, and the living languages of Arabic and Amharic. +</p> + +<p> +The Hebraic or Middle Class consists of the dead languages Biblical Hebrew, +the Samaritan Pentateuch (third century, <hi rend='smallcaps'>a. d.</hi>), +the Carthaginian, Phœnician Inscriptions, and the living language of the Jews. +</p> + +<p> +The Aramaic or Northern Class consists of the dead languages Chaldee (Masora, +Talmud, Targum, Biblical Chaldee), Syriac (Peshito, second cent. +<hi rend='smallcaps'>a. d.</hi>), Cuneiform Inscriptions of Babylon and +Nineveh, and the living language Neo-Syriac. +</p> + +<pb n='397'/><anchor id='Pg397'/> + +<p> +No. 3. Genealogical Table of the Turanian Family of Languages, Northern Division. +</p> + +<p> +The Northern Division of the Turanian Family consists of five Classes: the +Tungusic, Mongolic, Turkic, Samoyedic, and Finnic (Uralic). +</p> + +<p> +The Tungusic Class consists of two Branches: Western and Eastern. +</p> + +<p> +The Western Branch consists of the languages of the Chapogires (Upper +Tunguska), Orotongs (Lower Tunguska), and the People of Nyertchinsk. +</p> + +<p> +The Eastern Branch consists of the languages of the Lamutes (Coast of O'hotsk) +and Mandshu (China). +</p> + +<p> +The Mongolic Class consists of three Branches: Eastern or Mongols Proper, +Western Mongols, and Northern Mongols. +</p> + +<p> +The Eastern or Mongols Proper Class consists of the languages of the Sharra-Mongols +(South of Gobi), Khalkhas (North of Gobi), and Sharaigol (Tibet and Tangut). +</p> + +<p> +The Western Mongols Class consists of the languages of the Chosot (Kokonúr), Dsungur, +Torgod, Dürbet, Aimaks (tribes of Persia), and Sokpas (Tibet). +</p> + +<p> +The Northern Mongols Class consists of the language of the Buritäs (Lake Baikal). +</p> + +<p> +The Turkic Class consists of three Branches: Chagatic, S. E., Turkic, N., +and Turkic, W. +</p> + +<p> +The Chagatic Branch consists of the languages of the Uigurs, Komans, Chagatais, +Usbeks, Turkomans, and People of Kasan. +</p> + +<p> +The N. Turkic Branch consists of the languages of the Kirgis, Bashkirs, Nogais, +Kumians, Karachais, Karakalpaks, Meshcheryäks, People of Siberia, and Yakuts. +</p> + +<p> +The W. Turkic Branch consists of the languages of the People of Derbend, +Aderbijan, Krimea, Anatolia, and Rumelia. +</p> + +<p> +The Samoyedic Class consists of two Branches: Northern and Eastern. +</p> + +<p> +The Northern Branch consists of the languages of the Yurazes, Tawgi, and Yenisei. +</p> + +<p> +The Eastern Branch consists of the languages of the Ostiako-Samoyedes, and the Kamas. +</p> + +<p> +The Finnic (Uralic) Class consists of four Branches: Ugric, Bulgaric, Permic, +and Chudic. +</p> + +<p> +The Ugric Branch consists of the languages of the Hungarians, Voguls, and +Ugro-Ostiakes. +</p> + +<p> +The Bulgaric Branch consists of the languages of the Tcheremissians and Mordvins. +</p> + +<p> +The Permic Branch consists of the languages of the Permians, Sirianes, and Votiaks. +</p> + +<p> +The Chudic Branch consists of the languages of the Lapps, Finns, and Esths. +</p> + +<pb n='398'/><anchor id='Pg398'/> + +<p> +No. 4. Genealogical Table of the Turanian Family of Languages, Southern Division. +</p> + +<p> +The Southern Division of the Turanian Family consists of six Classes: the +Taïc, Malaic, Gangetic, Lohitic, Munda (See Turanian Languages, p. 175), +and Tamulic. +</p> + +<p> +The Taïc Class consists of the languages of Ahom, Laos, Khamti, and Shan +(Tenasserim). +</p> + +<p> +The Malaic Class consists of the languages of the Malay and Polynesian Islands. +(See Humboldt, Kavi Sprache.) +</p> + +<p> +The Gangetic Class consists of two Branches: the Trans-Himalayan, and the +Sub-Himalayan. +</p> + +<p> +The Trans-Himalayan Branch consists of the languages Tibetan, Horpa (N.W. Tibet, +Bucharia), Thochu-Sifan (N.E. Tibet, China), Gyarung-Sifan (N.E. Tibet, China), +Manyak-Sifan (N.E. Tibet, China), and Takpa (West of Kwombo). +</p> + +<p> +The Sub-Himalayan Branch consists of the languages Kenaveri (Setlej basin), +Sarpa (West of Gandakéan basin), Sunwár (Gandakéan basin), Gurung (Gandakéan basin), +Magar (Gandakéan basin), Newár (between Gandakéan and Koséan basins), +Murmi (between Gandakéan and Koséan basins), Limbú (Koséan basin), +Kiranti (Koséan basin), Lepcha (Tishtéan basin), Bhutanese (Manaséan basin), +and Chepang (Nepal-Terai). +</p> + +<p> +The Lohitic Class consists of the languages of Burmese (Burmah and Arakan), +Dhimâl (between Konki and Dhorla), Kachari-Bodo (Migrat. 80° to 93-1/2°, +and 25° to 27°), Garo (90°-91° E. long.; 25°-26° N. lat.), Changlo (91°-92° E. long.), +Mikir (Nowgong), Dophla (92° 50'-97° N. lat.), Miri (94°-97° E. long.?), +Abor-Miri, Abor (97°-99° E. long.), Sibsagor-Miri, Singpho (27°-28° N. lat.), +Naga tribes (93°-97° E. long.; 23° N. lat.) (Mithan) E. of Sibsagor, +Naga tribes (Namsang), Naga tribes (Nowgong), Naga tribes (Tengsa), Naga tribes +(Tablung N. of Sibsagor), Naga tribes (Khaü, Jorhat), Naga tribes (Angami, South), +Kuki (N.E. of Chittagong), Khyeng (Shyu) (19°-21° N. lat. Arakan), +Kami (Kuladan R. Arakan), Kumi (Kuladan R. Arakan), Shendus (22°-23° and 93-94°), +Mru (Arakan, Chittagong), Sak (Nauf River, East), and Tungihu (Tenasserim). +</p> + +<p> +The Munda Class consists of the languages Ho (Kolehan), Sinhbhum Kol (Chyebossa), +Sontal (Chyebossa), Bhumij (Chyebossa), Mundala (Chota Nagpur), and Canarese. +</p> + +<p> +The Tamulic Class consists of the languages Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam, Gond, +Brahvi, Tuluva, Toduva, and Uraon-kol. +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='399'/><anchor id='Pg399'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Index.</head> + +<lg> +<l>Abdu-l-Kadir Maluk, Mulla, Shah of Badáún, his general history of India, and other works, <ref target='Pg151'>151</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Abhîra, or Âbhîra, at the mouth of the Indus, <ref target='Pg204'>204</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Abiria, the, of Ptolemy, <ref target='Pg204'>204</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ablative, the, in Chinese, <ref target='Pg119'>119</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Abraham, the language of, <ref target='Pg278'>278</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Abu Saleh, his translation from Sanskrit into Arabic, <ref target='Pg150'>150</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Abyssinian language, ancient and modern, <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Academy, New, doctrines of the, embraced in Rome, <ref target='Pg107'>107</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Accusative, formation of the, in Chinese, <ref target='Pg118'>118</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Achæmenian dynasty, inscriptions of the, <ref target='Pg210'>210</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Adelung, his Mithridates, <ref target='Pg142'>142</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Adjectives, formation of, in Tibetan, <ref target='Pg113'>113</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>in Chinese, <ref target='Pg119'>119</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ælius Stilo, Lucius, his lectures in Rome, on Latin grammar, <ref target='Pg109'>109</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Affinity, indications of true, in the animal and vegetable world, <ref target='Pg026'>26</ref>, <ref target='Pg027'>27</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Afghanistan, the language of, <ref target='Pg210'>210</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Africa, South, dialects of, <ref target='Pg064'>64</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>African language, an imaginary, <ref target='Pg223'>223</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Âge</hi>, history of the French word, <ref target='Pg292'>292</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Agglutination in the Turanian family of languages, <ref target='Pg291'>291</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Aglossoi, the, of the Greeks, <ref target='Pg092'>92</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Agriculture of the Chaldeans, work on the, <ref target='Pg279'>279</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Punic work of Mago on, <ref target='Pg094'>94</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ahirs, the, of Cutch, <ref target='Pg204'>204</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Akbar, the Emperor, his search after the true religion, <ref target='Pg151'>151</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Akbar, his foundation of the so-called Ilahi religion, <ref target='Pg151'>151</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>works translated into Persian for him, <ref target='Pg151'>151</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>not able to obtain a translation of the Veda, <ref target='Pg152'>152</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Albania</hi>, origin of the name, <ref target='Pg242'>242</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Albanian language, origin of the, <ref target='Pg201'>201</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Albertus Magnus, on the humanizing influence of Christianity, quoted, <ref target='Pg129'>129</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Alchemy, causes of the extinction of the science, <ref target='Pg019'>19</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Alexander the Great, influence of his expedition in giving the Greeks a knowledge of other nations and languages, <ref target='Pg093'>93</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his difficulty in conversing with the Brahmans, <ref target='Pg093'>93</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Alexandria, influence of, on the study of foreign languages, <ref target='Pg096'>96</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>critical study of ancient Greek at, <ref target='Pg097'>97</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Algebra, translation of the famous Indian work on, into Arabic, <ref target='Pg149'>149</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Algonquins, the one case of the, <ref target='Pg221'>221</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>America, Central, rapid changes which take place in the language of the savage tribes of, <ref target='Pg062'>62</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>great number of languages spoken by the natives of, <ref target='Pg062'>62</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Hervas's reduction of them to eleven families, <ref target='Pg063'>63</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Amharic, or modern Abyssinian, <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Anatomy, comparative, science of, <ref target='Pg027'>27</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Anglo-Saxon, the most ancient epic in, <ref target='Pg177'>177</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Angora, in Galatia, battle of, <ref target='Pg308'>308</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<pb n='400'/><anchor id='Pg400'/> + +<lg> +<l>Anquetil Duperron, his translation of the Persian translation of the Upanishads into French, <ref target='Pg154'>154</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his translation of the works of Zoroaster, <ref target='Pg168'>168</ref>, <ref target='Pg206'>206</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Apollo, temple of, at Rome, <ref target='Pg102'>102</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>AR, the root, various ramifications of, <ref target='Pg252'>252</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Arabic, influence of, over the Turkish language, <ref target='Pg083'>83</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>ascendency of, in Palestine and Syria, <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>original seat of Arabic, <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>ancient Himyaritic inscriptions, <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>earliest literary documents in Arabic, <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>relation of Arabic to Hebrew, <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Aramaic division of Semitic languages, <ref target='Pg276'>276</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>two dialects of, <ref target='Pg276'>276</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ariana, the, of Greek geographers, <ref target='Pg240'>240</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Ariaramnēs</hi>, father of Darius, origin of the name, <ref target='Pg241'>241</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Aristotle on grammatical categories, <ref target='Pg097'>97</ref>, <ref target='Pg126'>126</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Armenia</hi>, origin of the name, <ref target='Pg242'>242</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Arpinum, provincial Latin of, <ref target='Pg067'>67</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Article</hi>, the, original meaning of the word, <ref target='Pg098'>98</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the Greek, restored by Zenodotus, <ref target='Pg099'>99</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ârya. <hi rend='italic'>See</hi> <ref target='index-aryan'>Aryan</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ârya-âvarta, India so called, <ref target='Pg237'>237</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<anchor id='index-aryan'/> +<l>Aryan, an Indo-European family of languages, <ref target='Pg043'>43</ref>, <ref target='Pg080'>80</ref>, <ref target='Pg177'>177</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>mode of tracing back the grammatical fragments of the Aryan languages to original independent words, <ref target='Pg231'>231-233</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Aryan grammar, <ref target='Pg234'>234</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>northern and southern divisions of the, <ref target='Pg211'>211</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the original Aryan clan of Central Asia, <ref target='Pg212'>212</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>period when this clan broke up, <ref target='Pg212'>212</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>formation of the locative in all the Aryan languages, <ref target='Pg219'>219</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Aryan civilization proved by the evidence of language, <ref target='Pg235'>235</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>origin and gradual spreading of the word <hi rend='italic'>Arya</hi>, <ref target='Pg236'>236</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>original seat of the Aryans, <ref target='Pg238'>238</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the Aryan and Semitic the only <hi rend='italic'>families</hi> of speech deserving that title, <ref target='Pg282'>282</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>genealogical table, <ref target='Pg394'>394</ref>, <ref target='Pg395'>395</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Asia Minor, origin of the Turks of, <ref target='Pg306'>306</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Asiatic Society, foundation of the, at Calcutta, <ref target='Pg158'>158</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Aśoka, King, his rock inscriptions, <ref target='Pg146'>146</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Assyria</hi>, various forms of the name, <ref target='Pg247'>247</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Astrology, causes of the extinction of the science, <ref target='Pg019'>19</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Astronomy</hi>, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg016'>16</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the Ptolemæan system, although wrong, important to science, <ref target='Pg026'>26</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Auramazda, of the cuneiform inscriptions, <ref target='Pg207'>207</ref>. <hi rend='italic'>See</hi> <ref target='index-ormuzd'>Ormuzd</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Auxentius on Ulfilas, <ref target='Pg181'>181-186</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Baber, his Indian empire, <ref target='Pg299'>299</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Babylonia, literature of, <ref target='Pg278'>278</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>probability of the recovery of, from the cuneiform inscriptions, <ref target='Pg278'>278</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Barabas tribe, in the steppes between the Irtish and the Ob, <ref target='Pg304'>304</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Barbarians, the, of the Greeks, <ref target='Pg091'>91</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>seemed to have possessed greater facility for acquiring languages than either Greeks or Romans, <ref target='Pg094'>94</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the term Barbarian as used by the Greeks and Romans, <ref target='Pg127'>127</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>unfortunate influence of the term, <ref target='Pg127'>127</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Bashkirs, race of the, in the Altaic mountains, <ref target='Pg303'>303</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Basil, St., his denial that God had created the names of all things, <ref target='Pg040'>40</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Baziane tribe, in the Caucasus, <ref target='Pg303'>303</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Beaver, the, sagacity of, <ref target='Pg024'>24</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Behar, Pâli once the popular dialect of, <ref target='Pg146'>146</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Beowolf, the ancient English epic of, <ref target='Pg177'>177</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Berber, dialects of Northern Africa, origin of the, <ref target='Pg282'>282</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<pb n='401'/><anchor id='Pg401'/> + +<lg> +<l>Berners, Juliana, on the expressions proper for certain things, <ref target='Pg072'>72</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Berosus, his study and cultivation of the Greek language, <ref target='Pg094'>94</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his history of Babylon, <ref target='Pg095'>95</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his knowledge of the cuneiform inscriptions, <ref target='Pg095'>95</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Bible, number of obsolete words and senses in the English translation of 1611, <ref target='Pg045'>45</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Bibliandro, his work on language, <ref target='Pg131'>131</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Birúni, Abu Rihan al, <ref target='Pg150'>150</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his <q>Taríkhu-l-Hind,</q> <ref target='Pg150'>150</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Bishop and sceptic derived from the same root, <ref target='Pg257'>257</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Boëthius, Song of, age of the, <ref target='Pg196'>196</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Bohemian, oldest specimens of, <ref target='Pg201'>201</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Bonaparte, Prince L., his collection of English dialects, <ref target='Pg070'>70</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Booker's <q>Scripture and Prayer-Book Glossary</q> referred to, <ref target='Pg045'>45</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Books, general destruction of, in China in 213, <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi> <ref target='Pg227'>227</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Bopp, Francis, his great work, <ref target='Pg166'>166</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>results of his <q>Comparative Grammar,</q> <ref target='Pg234'>234</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Botany</hi>, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg015'>15</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the Linnæan system, although imperfect, important to science, <ref target='Pg026'>26</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Brahman, the highest being, known through speech, <ref target='Pg088'>88</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Brahmans, their deification of language, <ref target='Pg087'>87</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>their early achievements in grammatical analysis, <ref target='Pg088'>88</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>difficulties of Alexander in conversing with them, <ref target='Pg093'>93</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Brâhmanas, the, on language, <ref target='Pg087'>87</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Brennus, <ref target='Pg199'>199</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Brown, Rev. Mr. on the dialects of the Burmese, <ref target='Pg063'>63</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Brutes, faculties of, <ref target='Pg351'>351</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>instinct and intellect, <ref target='Pg353'>353</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>language the difference between man and brute, <ref target='Pg354'>354</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the old name given to brutes, <ref target='Pg379'>379</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Buddhism, date of its introduction into China, <ref target='Pg147'>147</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Bulgarian Kingdom on the Danube, <ref target='Pg319'>319</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>language and literature, <ref target='Pg200'>200</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Bulgaric branch of the Finnic class of languages, <ref target='Pg319'>319</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Bulgarian tribes and dialects, <ref target='Pg319'>319</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Buriates, dialects of the, new phase of grammatical life of the, <ref target='Pg064'>64</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Burmese language and literature, <ref target='Pg063'>63</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>dialects, <ref target='Pg063'>63</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Burnouf, Eugène, his studies of Zend, <ref target='Pg168'>168</ref>, <ref target='Pg206'>206</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>and of cuneiform inscriptions, <ref target='Pg168'>168</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Cæsar, Julius, publication of his work <q>De analogia,</q> <ref target='Pg110'>110</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>invented the term <hi rend='italic'>ablative</hi>, <ref target='Pg110'>110</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Carneades forbidden by Cato to lecture at Rome, <ref target='Pg109'>109</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Carthaginian language, closely allied to Hebrew, <ref target='Pg280'>280</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Case</hi>, history of the word, <ref target='Pg111'>111</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Cases, formation of, in the Aryan languages, <ref target='Pg218'>218</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Cassius, Dionysius, of Utica, his translation of the agricultural work of Mago, <ref target='Pg095'>95</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Castor and Pollux, worship of, in Italy, <ref target='Pg102'>102</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Castren on the Mongolian dialects, <ref target='Pg064'>64</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Cat</hi>, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg365'>365</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Catherine the Great of Russia, her <q>Comparative Dictionary,</q> <ref target='Pg143'>143</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Cato, his history of Rome in Latin, <ref target='Pg104'>104</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his acquisition of the Greek language in his old age, <ref target='Pg106'>106</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>reasons for his opposition to everything Greek, <ref target='Pg106'>106</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Caucasus, tribes of the, <ref target='Pg303'>303</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Celtic language, substantive existence of, <ref target='Pg079'>79</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Celtic, a branch of the Indo-European family of languages, <ref target='Pg198'>198</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Celts, their former political autonomy, <ref target='Pg198'>198</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Chaldee, in what it consisted, <ref target='Pg276'>276</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>fragments in Ezra, <ref target='Pg276'>276</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>language of the Targums, <ref target='Pg277'>277</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>literature of Babylon and Nineveh, <ref target='Pg278'>278</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the modern Mendaïtes or Nasoreans, <ref target='Pg279'>279</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Changes, historical, affecting every variety of language. <ref target='Pg044'>44</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>rapid changes in the languages of savage tribes, <ref target='Pg044'>44</ref>.</l> +<pb n='402'/><anchor id='Pg402'/> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>words or senses obsolete in English since 1611, <ref target='Pg045'>45</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>smaller changes, <ref target='Pg045'>45</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>grammatical changes, <ref target='Pg046'>46</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>laws of, in language, <ref target='Pg073'>73</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Children, probable influence of the language of, on the gradual disappearance of irregular conjugations and declensions, <ref target='Pg075'>75</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Chili, language of, <ref target='Pg293'>293</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>China, date of the introduction of Buddhism into, <ref target='Pg147'>147</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Chinese Buddhist pilgrims to India, <ref target='Pg149'>149</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>conquered by the Mongols, <ref target='Pg299'>299</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Chinese language, ancient, no trace of grammar in, <ref target='Pg086'>86</ref>, <ref target='Pg117'>117</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>notes by M. Stanislas Julien, on Chinese substantives and adjectives, <ref target='Pg118'>118</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>formation of the locative in Chinese, <ref target='Pg218'>218</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>and of the instrumental, <ref target='Pg218'>218</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>number of roots in Chinese, <ref target='Pg265'>265</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>number of words in the Chinese dictionary, obsolete, rare, and in use, <ref target='Pg265'>265</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>no analysis required to discover its component parts, <ref target='Pg272'>272</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>mode of using a predicative root in, <ref target='Pg268'>268</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>roots in Chinese, <ref target='Pg287'>287</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the parts of speech determined in Chinese by the position of the word in a sentence, <ref target='Pg288'>288</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>rudimentary traces of agglutination in Chinese, <ref target='Pg329'>329</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>imitative sounds in, <ref target='Pg366'>366</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>list of Chinese interjections, <ref target='Pg369'>369</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>natural selection of roots in, <ref target='Pg386'>386</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Chingis-Khán, founds the Mongolian empire, <ref target='Pg296'>296</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Christianity, humanizing influence of, <ref target='Pg128'>128</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Chudic branch of the Finnic languages, <ref target='Pg317'>317</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Chudic, the national epic of the Finns, <ref target='Pg317'>317</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Cicero, his provincial Latin, <ref target='Pg067'>67</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>quoted as an authority on grammatical questions, <ref target='Pg109'>109</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Cæsar's <hi rend='italic'>De analogia</hi> dedicated to Cicero, <ref target='Pg110'>110</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Class dialects, <ref target='Pg066'>66</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Classical, or literary languages, origin of, <ref target='Pg065'>65</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>stagnation and inevitable decay of, <ref target='Pg068'>68</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Classification, in the physical sciences, <ref target='Pg024'>24</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>object of classification, <ref target='Pg027'>27</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Colchis, dialects of, according to Pliny, <ref target='Pg061'>61</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Conjugation, most of the terminations of, demonstrative roots, <ref target='Pg270'>270</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Constantinople, taking of, <ref target='Pg308'>308</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Copernicus, causes which led to the discovery of his system, <ref target='Pg029'>29</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Cornish, last person who spoke, <ref target='Pg080'>80</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Cosmopolitan Club, <ref target='Pg107'>107</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Crates of Pergamus, his visit to Rome, <ref target='Pg109'>109</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his public lectures, there on grammar, <ref target='Pg109'>109</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Cuckoo</hi>, the word, <ref target='Pg361'>361</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Cuneiform inscriptions, the, deciphered by Burnouf, <ref target='Pg168'>168</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>importance of the discovery of the inscriptions of Darius and Xerxes, <ref target='Pg206'>206</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>progress in deciphering, <ref target='Pg278'>278</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>letter from Sir H. Rawlinson quoted, <ref target='Pg278'>278</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>D, origin of the letter, in forming English preterites, <ref target='Pg231'>231</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Dacian language, the ancient, <ref target='Pg126'>126</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>, <ref target='Pg195'>195</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Dame</hi>, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg226'>226</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Danish language, growth of the, <ref target='Pg071'>71</ref>, <ref target='Pg191'>191</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Darius, claimed for himself an Aryan descent, <ref target='Pg241'>241</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Dative, case in Greek, <ref target='Pg221'>221</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>in Chinese, <ref target='Pg118'>118</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Daughter</hi>, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg057'>57</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Decay, phonetic, one of the processes which comprise the growth of language, <ref target='Pg051'>51</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>instances of phonetic decay, <ref target='Pg052'>52-54</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Declension, most of the terminations of, demonstrative roots, <ref target='Pg270'>270</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Dello</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>dell</hi>, origins of the Italian, <ref target='Pg075'>75</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Democritus, his travels, <ref target='Pg094'>94</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Dialect, what is meant by, <ref target='Pg058'>58</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Dialects, Italian, <ref target='Pg058'>58</ref>, <ref target='Pg069'>69</ref>.</l> +<pb n='403'/><anchor id='Pg403'/> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>French, <ref target='Pg059'>59</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Modern Greek, <ref target='Pg058'>58</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Friesian, <ref target='Pg059'>59</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>English, <ref target='Pg060'>60</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the feeders rather than the channels of a literary language, <ref target='Pg060'>60</ref>, <ref target='Pg070'>70</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Grimm on the origin of dialects in general, <ref target='Pg060'>60</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>difficulty in tracing the history of dialects, <ref target='Pg061'>61</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>American dialects, <ref target='Pg063'>63</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Burmese, <ref target='Pg063'>63</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>of the Ostiakes, <ref target='Pg063'>63</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Mongolian, <ref target='Pg064'>64</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Southern Africa, <ref target='Pg064'>64</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>class dialects, <ref target='Pg066'>66</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>unbounded resources of dialects, <ref target='Pg071'>71</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>dialectical growth beyond the control of individuals, <ref target='Pg074'>74</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Dictionary, Comparative, of Catherine the Great of Russia, <ref target='Pg143'>143</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Did</hi>, origin of, as a preterite, <ref target='Pg233'>233</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Diez, Professor, his <q>Comparative Grammar of the Six Romance Dialects,</q> <ref target='Pg196'>196</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Dionysius Thrax, the author of the first practical Greek grammar, <ref target='Pg100'>100</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Dionysius of Halicarnassus, on the Pelasgi, <ref target='Pg125'>125</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Discussion</hi>, etymology of, <ref target='Pg052'>52</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Dorpat dialect of Esthonian, <ref target='Pg318'>318</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Du</hi>, origin of the French, <ref target='Pg074'>74</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Dual, the, first recognized by Zenodotus, <ref target='Pg099'>99</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Dumaresq, Rev. Daniel, his <q>Comparative Vocabulary of Eastern Languages,</q> <ref target='Pg143'>143</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Duret, Claude, his work on language, <ref target='Pg132'>132</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Dutch language, work of Goropius written to prove that it was the language spoken in Paradise, <ref target='Pg135'>135</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>age of Dutch, <ref target='Pg178'>178</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Earl, origin of the title, <ref target='Pg226'>226</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Earth, guess of Philolaus as to its motion round the sun, <ref target='Pg029'>29</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Eddas, the two, <ref target='Pg191'>191</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the name Edda, <ref target='Pg194'>194</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Egypt, number of words in the ancient vocabulary of, <ref target='Pg266'>266</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Egyptian language, family to which it is referable, <ref target='Pg282'>282</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Elder, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg226'>226</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Elements, constituent, of language, <ref target='Pg250'>250</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>English language, changes in the, since the translation of the Bible in 1611, <ref target='Pg046'>46</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>richness of the vocabulary of the dialects of, <ref target='Pg060'>60</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>real sources of the English language, <ref target='Pg069'>69</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Prince L. Bonaparte's collection of English dialects, <ref target='Pg070'>70</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the English language Teutonic, <ref target='Pg080'>80</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>full of words derived from the most distant sources, <ref target='Pg084'>84</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>proportion of Saxon to Norman words, <ref target='Pg084'>84</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>tests proving the Teutonic origin of the English language, <ref target='Pg085'>85</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>genitives in English, <ref target='Pg117'>117</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>nominatives and accusatives, <ref target='Pg119'>119</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>origin of grammatical forms in the English language, <ref target='Pg120'>120</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>number of words in the English language, <ref target='Pg266'>266</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>number of words in Milton, Shakspeare, and the Old Testament, <ref target='Pg267'>267</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ennius, <ref target='Pg105'>105</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his translations from Greek into Latin, <ref target='Pg105'>105</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Eos, original meaning of the name, <ref target='Pg021'>21</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ephraem Syrus, <ref target='Pg276'>276</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Epicharmus, his philosophy translated into Latin by Ennius, <ref target='Pg105'>105</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Epicurus, doctrines of, embraced, in Rome, <ref target='Pg107'>107</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Erin</hi>, Pictet's derivation of the name, <ref target='Pg245'>245</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Mr. Whitley Stokes's remarks on the word Erin, <ref target='Pg245'>245</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Espiègle</hi>, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg260'>260</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Esths, or Esthonians, their language, <ref target='Pg318'>318</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>dialects of, <ref target='Pg318'>318</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Estienne, Henry, his grammatical labors anticipated by the Brahmans, 500 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b. c.</hi> <ref target='Pg088'>88</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his work on language, <ref target='Pg131'>131</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<pb n='404'/><anchor id='Pg404'/> + +<lg> +<l>Ethiopic, or Abyssinian, origin of the, <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Eudemos, on the Aryan race, <ref target='Pg241'>241</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Euhemerus, of Messene, his neologian work translated into Latin, by Ennius, <ref target='Pg105'>105</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Eulalia, Song of, age of the, <ref target='Pg196'>196</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Euripides, first translated into Latin, by Ennius, <ref target='Pg105'>105</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ewald, on the relation of the Turanian to the Aryan languages, <ref target='Pg338'>338</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ezour-Veda, the, <ref target='Pg156'>156</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ezra, Chaldee fragments in the Book of, <ref target='Pg276'>276</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Fabius Pictor, his history of Rome in Greek, <ref target='Pg104'>104</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Fa-hian, the Chinese pilgrim to India, his travels, <ref target='Pg149'>149</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Families of languages, tests for reducing the principal dialects of Europe and Asia to certain, <ref target='Pg172'>172</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Fatum</hi>, original meaning of the name, <ref target='Pg021'>21</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Feeble</hi>, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg123'>123</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Feizi and the Brahman, story of, <ref target='Pg152'>152</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Feu</hi>, origin of the French word, <ref target='Pg123'>123</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Finnic class of languages, <ref target='Pg315'>315</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>branches of Finnic, <ref target='Pg316'>316</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the <q>Kalewala,</q> the <q>Iliad</q> of the Finns, <ref target='Pg318'>318</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>tribes, original seat of the, <ref target='Pg315'>315</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>their language and literature, <ref target='Pg317'>317</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>national feeling lately arisen, <ref target='Pg317'>317</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Finnish, peculiarity of its grammar, <ref target='Pg119'>119</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Firdusi, language in which he wrote his <q>Shahnameh,</q> <ref target='Pg210'>210</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Fire-worshippers. <hi rend='italic'>See</hi> <ref target='index-parsis'>Parsis</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Firoz Shah, translations from Sanskrit into Persian, made by order of, <ref target='Pg150'>150</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Flaminius, his knowledge of Greek, <ref target='Pg103'>103</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Flemish language and literature, <ref target='Pg178'>178</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>French dialects, number of, <ref target='Pg058'>58</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>laws of change in the French language, <ref target='Pg073'>73</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>nominatives and accusatives, <ref target='Pg119'>119</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>French, origin of grammatical terminations in French, <ref target='Pg229'>229</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>origin of the French future in <hi rend='italic'>rai</hi>, <ref target='Pg229'>229</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Friesian, multitude of the dialects of, <ref target='Pg059'>59</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>language and literature, <ref target='Pg178'>178</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Fromage</hi>, origin of the French word, <ref target='Pg123'>123</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Future, the, in French, <ref target='Pg229'>229</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>in Latin, <ref target='Pg230'>230</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>in Greek, <ref target='Pg230'>230</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>in Chinese, <ref target='Pg388'>388</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>in other languages, <ref target='Pg231'>231</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Galatia, foundation and language of, <ref target='Pg199'>199</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Galla language of Africa, family to which it belongs, <ref target='Pg282'>282</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ganas, the, or lists of remarkable words in Sanskrit, <ref target='Pg116'>116</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Garo, formation of adjectives in, <ref target='Pg113'>113</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Gâthâs, or songs of Zoroaster, <ref target='Pg209'>209</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Gebelin, Court de, his <q>Monde Primitif,</q> <ref target='Pg140'>140</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>compared with Hervas, <ref target='Pg140'>140</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Gees language, <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Genitive case, the term used in India, <ref target='Pg111'>111</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>terminations of the genitive in most cases, identical with the derivative suffixes by which substantives are changed into adjectives, <ref target='Pg112'>112</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>mode of forming the genitive in Chinese, <ref target='Pg118'>118</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>formation of genitives in Latin, <ref target='Pg220'>220</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Geometry</hi>, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg015'>15</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>German language, history of the, <ref target='Pg179'>179</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Gipsies, language of the, <ref target='Pg211'>211</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Glass, painted, before and since the Reformation, <ref target='Pg020'>20</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Gordon, Captain, on the dialects of Burmese, <ref target='Pg063'>63</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Goropius, his work written to prove that Dutch was the language spoken in Paradise, <ref target='Pg135'>135</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Gospel</hi>, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg122'>122</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Gothic, a modern language, <ref target='Pg122'>122</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>similarity between Gothic and Latin, <ref target='Pg127'>127</ref>.</l> +<pb n='405'/><anchor id='Pg405'/> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>class of languages to which Gothic belongs, <ref target='Pg189'>189</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>number of roots in it, <ref target='Pg265'>265</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Goths, the, and Bishop Ulfilas, <ref target='Pg187'>187</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Grammar, the criterion of relationship in almost all languages, <ref target='Pg085'>85</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>English grammar unmistakably of Teutonic origin, <ref target='Pg085'>85</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>no trace of grammar in ancient Chinese, <ref target='Pg086'>86</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>early achievements of the Brahmans in grammar, <ref target='Pg088'>88</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>and the Greeks, <ref target='Pg089'>89</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>origin of grammar, <ref target='Pg090'>90</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>causes of the earnestness with which Greek grammar was taken up at Rome, <ref target='Pg108'>108</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the Hindú science of grammar, <ref target='Pg116'>116</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>origin and history of Sanskrit grammar, <ref target='Pg116'>116</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>origin of grammatical forms, <ref target='Pg120'>120</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>historical evidence, <ref target='Pg121'>121</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>collateral evidence, <ref target='Pg122'>122</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>genealogical classification, <ref target='Pg124'>124</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>comparative value of grammar in the classification of languages, <ref target='Pg170'>170</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>comparative grammar, <ref target='Pg214'>214</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Bopp's <q>Comparative Grammar,</q> <ref target='Pg214'>214</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>origin of grammatical forms, <ref target='Pg215'>215</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>mode of tracing back the grammatical framework of the Aryan languages to original independent words, <ref target='Pg231'>231-234</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>result of Bopp's <q>Comparative Grammar,</q> <ref target='Pg234'>234</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Aryan grammar, <ref target='Pg234'>234</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Turkish grammar, <ref target='Pg308'>308</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Turkic grammar, <ref target='Pg309'>309</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Grammatici, the, at Rome, <ref target='Pg103'>103</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Greek language, the, studied and cultivated by the barbarians, Berosus, Menander, and Manetho, <ref target='Pg094'>94</ref>, <ref target='Pg095'>95</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>critical study of ancient Greek at Alexandria, <ref target='Pg097'>97</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the first practical Greek grammar, <ref target='Pg100'>100</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>generally spoken at Rome, <ref target='Pg101'>101</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Greek, earnestness with which Greek grammar was taken up at Rome, <ref target='Pg108'>108</ref>, <ref target='Pg110'>110</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>principles which governed the formation of adjectives and genitives, <ref target='Pg113'>113</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>spread of the Greek grammar, <ref target='Pg114'>114</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>genitives in Greek, <ref target='Pg117'>117</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the principle of classification, never applied to speech by the Greeks, <ref target='Pg124'>124</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Greeks and Barbarians, <ref target='Pg125'>125</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Plato's notion of the origin of the Greek language, <ref target='Pg126'>126</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>similarity between Greek and Sanskrit, <ref target='Pg142'>142</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>affinity between Sanskrit and Greek, <ref target='Pg159'>159</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>formation of the dative in Greek, <ref target='Pg221'>221</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the future in Greek, <ref target='Pg230'>230</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>number of forms each verb in Greek yields, if conjugated through all its voices, tenses &c., <ref target='Pg272'>272</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>modern, number of the dialects of, <ref target='Pg058'>58</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Greeks, their speculations on languages, <ref target='Pg089'>89</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the Grammarians, <ref target='Pg090'>90</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>reasons why the ancient Greeks never thought of learning a foreign language, <ref target='Pg092'>92</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>first encouragement given by trade to interpreters, <ref target='Pg093'>93</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>imaginary travels of Greek philosophers, <ref target='Pg094'>94</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the Greek use of the term Barbarian, <ref target='Pg127'>127</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Gregory of Nyssa, St., his defence of St. Basil, <ref target='Pg040'>40</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Grimm, on the origin of dialects in general, quoted, <ref target='Pg060'>60</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>on the idiom of nomads, quoted, <ref target='Pg071'>71</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his <q>Teutonic Grammar,</q> <ref target='Pg167'>167</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Growth of language, <ref target='Pg047'>47</ref>, <ref target='Pg066'>66</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>examination of the idea that man can change or improve language, <ref target='Pg048'>48</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>causes of the growth of language, <ref target='Pg050'>50</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Guichard, Estienne, his work on language, <ref target='Pg132'>132</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Guebres. <hi rend='italic'>See</hi> <ref target='index-parsis'>Parsis</ref>. </l> +</lg> + +<pb n='406'/><anchor id='Pg406'/> + +<lg> +<l>Halhead, his remarks on the affinity between Greek and Sanskrit, quoted, <ref target='Pg159'>159</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his <q>Code of Gentoo Laws,</q> <ref target='Pg159'>159</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Hamilton, Sir W., on the origin of the general and particular in language, <ref target='Pg377'>377</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Harald Ilaarfagr, King of Norway, his despotic rule and its consequences, <ref target='Pg192'>192</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Haru-spex, origin of the name, <ref target='Pg259'>259</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Harun-al-Rashid, translations made from Sanskrit works at his court, <ref target='Pg149'>149</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Haug, his labors in Zend, <ref target='Pg209'>209</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Haussa language of Africa, family to which it belongs, <ref target='Pg282'>282</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Hebrew, idea of the fathers of the church that it was the primitive language of mankind, <ref target='Pg132'>132</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>amount of learning and ingenuity wasted on this question, <ref target='Pg133'>133</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Leibniz, the first who really conquered this prejudice, <ref target='Pg135'>135</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>number of roots in, <ref target='Pg265'>265</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>ancient form of the, <ref target='Pg280'>280</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Aramean modifications of, <ref target='Pg280'>280</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>swept away by Arabic, <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Hekate, an old name of the moon, <ref target='Pg022'>22</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><q>Heljand,</q> the, of the Low Germans, <ref target='Pg178'>178</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Hellenic branch of the Indo-European family of languages, <ref target='Pg198'>198</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Herat, origin of the name, <ref target='Pg247'>247</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Hermippus, his translation of the works of Zoroaster into Greek, <ref target='Pg096'>96</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Herodotus, his travels, <ref target='Pg094'>94</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>on the Pelasgi, <ref target='Pg125'>125</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Hervas, his reduction of the multitude of American dialects to eleven families, <ref target='Pg063'>63</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his list of works published during the 16th century, on the science of language, <ref target='Pg131'>131</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>account of him and of his labors, <ref target='Pg139'>139</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>compared with Gebelin, <ref target='Pg140'>140</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his discovery of the Malay and Polynesian family of speech, <ref target='Pg141'>141</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Hickes, on the proportion of Saxon to Norman words in the English language, <ref target='Pg084'>84</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Himyaritic, inscriptions in, <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Hindústání, real origin of, <ref target='Pg070'>70</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the genitive and adjective in, <ref target='Pg113'>113</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Urdu-zeban, the proper name of Hindústání, <ref target='Pg316'>316</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Hiouen-thsang, the Chinese pilgrim, his travels into India, <ref target='Pg149'>149</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Hiram, fleet of, <ref target='Pg202'>202</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>History and language, connection between, <ref target='Pg076'>76</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Hliod, or quida, of Norway, <ref target='Pg193'>193</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Saemund's collection of, <ref target='Pg193'>193</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Hoei-seng, the Chinese pilgrim to India, his travels, <ref target='Pg149'>149</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Homer, critical study of, at Alexandria, <ref target='Pg097'>97</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>influence of the critical study of, on the development of grammatical terminology, <ref target='Pg098'>98</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Horace, on the changes Latin had undergone in his time, <ref target='Pg067'>67</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Hors</hi>, origin of the French word, <ref target='Pg123'>123</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>House</hi>, name for in Sanskrit, and other Aryan languages, <ref target='Pg236'>236</ref>, and <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Humanity, the word not to be found in Plato or Aristotle, <ref target='Pg128'>128</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Humboldt, Alex. von, on the limits of exact knowledge, quoted, <ref target='Pg029'>29</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Humboldt, William von, his patronage of Comparative Philology, <ref target='Pg167'>167</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Hungarians, ancestors of the, <ref target='Pg320'>320</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>language of the, <ref target='Pg320'>320</ref>, <ref target='Pg321'>321</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>its affinity to the Ugro-Finnic dialects, <ref target='Pg321'>321</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Huron Indians, rapid changes in the dialects of the, <ref target='Pg062'>62</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Hyades, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg017'>17</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ibn-Wahshiyyah, the Chaldean, his Arabic translation of <q>the Nabatean Agriculture,</q> <ref target='Pg279'>279</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>account of him and his works, <ref target='Pg279'>279</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Iceland, foundation of an aristocratic republic in, <ref target='Pg192'>192</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>intellectual and literary activity of the people of, <ref target='Pg192'>192</ref>.</l> +<pb n='407'/><anchor id='Pg407'/> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>later history of, <ref target='Pg193'>193</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Icelandic language, <ref target='Pg190'>190</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Iconium, Turkish, sultans of, <ref target='Pg307'>307</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Illumination of Manuscripts, lost art of, <ref target='Pg020'>20</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Illyrians, Greek and Roman writers on the race and language of the, <ref target='Pg126'>126</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Illyrian language, the ancient, <ref target='Pg196'>196</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Illyrian languages, <ref target='Pg200'>200</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>India, the Mulla Abdu-l-Kádir Maluk's general history of, <ref target='Pg151'>151</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>origin of the name of <hi rend='italic'>India</hi>, <ref target='Pg228'>228</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Indian Philosophers, difficulty of admitting the influence of, on Greek philosophers, <ref target='Pg094'>94</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Indies, East</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>West</hi>, historical meaning of the names, <ref target='Pg227'>227</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Indo-European family of languages. <hi rend='italic'>See</hi> <ref target='index-aryan'>Aryan</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Inflectional stage of language, <ref target='Pg324'>324</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Instrumental, formation of the, in Chinese, <ref target='Pg119'>119</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>, <ref target='Pg218'>218</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Interjectional theory of roots, <ref target='Pg367'>367</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Interpreters, first encouragement given to, by trade, <ref target='Pg093'>93</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Irán, modern name of Persia, origin of the, <ref target='Pg242'>242</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Iranic class of languages, <ref target='Pg205'>205</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Iron</hi>, name for, in Sanskrit and Gothic, <ref target='Pg236'>236</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Iron, the Os of the Caucasus calling themselves, <ref target='Pg243'>243</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Italian dialects, number of, <ref target='Pg058'>58</ref>, <ref target='Pg197'>197</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>natural growth of, <ref target='Pg067'>67</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>real sources of, <ref target='Pg069'>69</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Italians, the, indebted to the Greeks for the very rudiments of civilization, <ref target='Pg101'>101</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Italic class of languages, <ref target='Pg196'>196</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Italy, dialects spoken in, before the rise of Rome, <ref target='Pg197'>197</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Its</hi>, as a possessive pronoun, introduction of, <ref target='Pg046'>46</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Jerome, St., his opinion that Hebrew was the primitive language of mankind, <ref target='Pg132'>132</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Jews, literary idiom of the, in the century preceding and following the Christian era, <ref target='Pg277'>277</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>and from the fourth to the tenth centuries, <ref target='Pg277'>277</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>their adoption of Arabic, <ref target='Pg277'>277</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>their return to a kind of modernized Hebrew, <ref target='Pg277'>277</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Jones, Sir William, his remarks on the affinity between Sanskrit and Greek, <ref target='Pg159'>159</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Julien, M. Stanislas, his notes on the Chinese language, <ref target='Pg118'>118</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Justinian, the Emperor, sends an embassy to the Turks, <ref target='Pg302'>302</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><q>Kalewala,</q> the, the <q>Iliad</q> of the Finns, <ref target='Pg318'>318</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Kalmüks, the, <ref target='Pg296'>296</ref>, <ref target='Pg300'>300</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Kapchakian empire, the, <ref target='Pg297'>297</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Kara-Kalpak tribes near Aral-Lake, <ref target='Pg304'>304</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Karelian dialect of Finnic, <ref target='Pg318'>318</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Karians, Greek authors on the, <ref target='Pg125'>125</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Kempe, André, his notion of the languages spoken in Paradise, <ref target='Pg135'>135</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Kepler, quoted, <ref target='Pg129'>129</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Khi-nie, the Chinese pilgrim, his travels into India, <ref target='Pg149'>149</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Kirgis tribe, the, <ref target='Pg305'>305</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Kirgis Hordes, the three, <ref target='Pg305'>305</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Kirgis-Kasak, tribe of the, <ref target='Pg305'>305</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Kumüks, tribe of the, in the Caucasus, <ref target='Pg303'>303</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Kuthami, the Nabatean, his work on <q>Nabatean Agriculture,</q> <ref target='Pg280'>280</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>period in which he lived, <ref target='Pg280'>280</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Laban, language of, <ref target='Pg278'>278</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Language, science of, one of the physical sciences, <ref target='Pg011'>11</ref>, <ref target='Pg031'>31</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>modern date of the science of, <ref target='Pg013'>13</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>names of the science of, <ref target='Pg014'>14</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>meaning of the science of, <ref target='Pg014'>14</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>little it offers to the utilitarian spirit of our age, <ref target='Pg020'>20</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>modern importance of the science of, in political and social questions, <ref target='Pg022'>22</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the barrier between man and beast, <ref target='Pg023'>23</ref>.</l> +<pb n='408'/><anchor id='Pg408'/> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>importance of the science of, <ref target='Pg033'>33</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>realm of, <ref target='Pg035'>35</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the growth of, in contradistinction to the history of, <ref target='Pg038'>38</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Dr. Whewell on the classification of, <ref target='Pg038'>38</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>examination of objections against the science of, as a physical science, <ref target='Pg039'>39</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>considered as an invention of man, <ref target='Pg039'>39</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the science of, considered as a historical science, <ref target='Pg042'>42</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>historical changes of, <ref target='Pg044'>44</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>almost stationary amongst highly civilized nations, <ref target='Pg045'>45</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>growth of, <ref target='Pg047'>47</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the idea that man can change or improve language examined, <ref target='Pg048'>48</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>causes of the growth of, <ref target='Pg050'>50</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>processes of the growth of:—</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>1. phonetic decay, <ref target='Pg051'>51</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>2. dialectical regeneration, <ref target='Pg058'>58</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>laws of change in, <ref target='Pg073'>73</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>futile attempts of single grammarians and purists to improve, <ref target='Pg075'>75</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>connection between language and history, <ref target='Pg077'>77</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>independent of historical events, <ref target='Pg079'>79</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>no possibility of a mixed, <ref target='Pg082'>82</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the Empirical Stage in the historical progress of the science of, <ref target='Pg087'>87</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>speculations of the Brahmans and Greeks, <ref target='Pg087'>87</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the classificatory stage of, <ref target='Pg115'>115</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>empirical or formal grammar, <ref target='Pg117'>117</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>genealogical classification of, <ref target='Pg124'>124</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Hervas's catalogue of works published during the 16th century on the science of language, <ref target='Pg131'>131</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Leibniz, <ref target='Pg135'>135</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Hervas, <ref target='Pg139'>139</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Adelung, <ref target='Pg142'>142</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Catherine the Great, <ref target='Pg143'>143</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>importance of the discovery of Sanskrit, <ref target='Pg146'>146</ref>, <ref target='Pg170'>170</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>value of comparative grammar, <ref target='Pg170'>170</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>glance at the modern history of language, <ref target='Pg173'>173</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>distinction between the radical and formal elements of, <ref target='Pg215'>215</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>constituent elements of, <ref target='Pg250'>250</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>morphological classification, <ref target='Pg275'>275</ref>, <ref target='Pg286'>286</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the inflectional stage of, <ref target='Pg324'>324</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>consideration of the problem of a common origin of languages, <ref target='Pg326'>326</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>former theories, <ref target='Pg345'>345</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>proper method of inquiry, <ref target='Pg347'>347</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>man and brutes, faculties of, <ref target='Pg350'>350</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the difference between man and brute, <ref target='Pg354'>354</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the inward power of which language is the outward sign and manifestation, <ref target='Pg355'>355</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>universal ideas, <ref target='Pg356'>356</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>general ideas and roots, <ref target='Pg356'>356</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the primum cognitum and primum appellatum, <ref target='Pg370'>370</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>knowing and naming, <ref target='Pg378'>378</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>language and reason, <ref target='Pg383'>383</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>sound and thought, <ref target='Pg384'>384</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>natural selection of roots, <ref target='Pg386'>386</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>nothing arbitrary in language, <ref target='Pg389'>389</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>origin and confusion of tongues, <ref target='Pg391'>391</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the radical stage of language, <ref target='Pg285'>285</ref>, <ref target='Pg286'>286</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the terminational stage, <ref target='Pg285'>285</ref>, <ref target='Pg288'>288</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the inflectional stage, <ref target='Pg285'>285</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Languages, number of known, <ref target='Pg035'>35</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>teaching of foreign languages comparatively a modern invention, <ref target='Pg091'>91</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>reason why the ancient Greeks never learned foreign languages, <ref target='Pg091'>91</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'><q>The Mountain of Languages,</q> <ref target='Pg093'>93</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>genealogical classification of, <ref target='Pg166'>166</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>tests for reducing the principal dialects in Europe and Asia to certain families of languages, <ref target='Pg174'>174</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>genealogical classification not applicable to all languages, <ref target='Pg174'>174</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>radical relationship, <ref target='Pg176'>176</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>comparative grammar, <ref target='Pg214'>214</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<pb n='409'/><anchor id='Pg409'/> + +<lg> +<l>Languages, formal and radical elements of, <ref target='Pg216'>216</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>all formal elements of language originally substantial, <ref target='Pg228'>228</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>degrees of relationship of, <ref target='Pg284'>284</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>all languages reducible in the end to roots, <ref target='Pg286'>286</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Langue d'Oil, ancient song in the, <ref target='Pg198'>198</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Laps, or Laplanders, <ref target='Pg319'>319</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>their habitat, <ref target='Pg319'>319</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>their language, <ref target='Pg319'>319</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Latin, what is meant by, <ref target='Pg067'>67</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>changes in, according to Polybius, <ref target='Pg067'>67</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the old Salian poems, <ref target='Pg067'>67</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>provincialisms of Cicero, <ref target='Pg067'>67</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>stagnation of Latin when it became the language of civilization, <ref target='Pg068'>68</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Latin genitives, <ref target='Pg117'>117</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>similarity between Gothic and Latin, <ref target='Pg127'>127</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>genealogical relation of Latin to Greek, <ref target='Pg172'>172</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the future in Latin, <ref target='Pg230'>230</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Leibniz, the first to conquer the prejudice that Hebrew was the primitive language of mankind, <ref target='Pg135'>135</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>and the first to apply the principle of inductive reasoning to the subject of language, <ref target='Pg135'>135</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his letter to Peter the Great, quoted, <ref target='Pg136'>136</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his labors in the science of language, <ref target='Pg137'>137</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his various studies, <ref target='Pg138'>138</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>on the formation of thought and language, quoted, <ref target='Pg373'>373</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Lesbos, dialects of the island of, <ref target='Pg059'>59</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Lettic language, the, <ref target='Pg199'>199</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Lewis, Sir Cornewall, his criticisms on the theory of Raynouard, <ref target='Pg171'>171</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Linnæus, his system, although imperfect, important to science, <ref target='Pg026'>26</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Literary languages, origin of, <ref target='Pg065'>65</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>inevitable decay of, <ref target='Pg068'>68</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Lithuanian language, the, <ref target='Pg199'>199</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the oldest document in, <ref target='Pg199'>199</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Livius Andronicus, <ref target='Pg104'>104</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his translation of the Odyssey into Latin verse, <ref target='Pg104'>104</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Livonians, dialect of the, <ref target='Pg318'>318</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Locative, formation of the, in all the Aryan languages, <ref target='Pg219'>219</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>in Chinese, <ref target='Pg119'>119</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>, <ref target='Pg218'>218</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>in Latin, <ref target='Pg220'>220</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Locke, John, on language as the barrier between man and brutes, quoted, <ref target='Pg024'>24</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>on universal ideas, quoted, <ref target='Pg356'>356</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his opinion on the origin of language, <ref target='Pg040'>40</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Lord</hi>, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg122'>122</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Lord's Prayer, number of languages in which it was published by various authors in the 16th century, <ref target='Pg131'>131</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Lucilius, his book on the reform of Latin orthography, <ref target='Pg109'>109</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Lucina, a name of the moon, <ref target='Pg021'>21</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Luna, origin of the name, <ref target='Pg021'>21</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Lusatia, language of, <ref target='Pg200'>200</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Lycurgus, his travels mythical, <ref target='Pg094'>94</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Macedonians, ancient authors on the, <ref target='Pg125'>125</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Madam</hi>, origin of word, <ref target='Pg226'>226</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Mago, the Carthaginian, his book on agriculture in Punic, <ref target='Pg094'>94</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Man</hi>, ancient words for, <ref target='Pg381'>381</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Man and brutes, faculties of, <ref target='Pg349'>349</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>difference between man and brutes, <ref target='Pg354'>354</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Mandshu tribes, speaking a Tungusic language, <ref target='Pg296'>296</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>grammar of, <ref target='Pg323'>323</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>imitative sounds in, <ref target='Pg366'>366</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Manetho, his study and cultivation of the Greek language, <ref target='Pg095'>95</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his work on Egypt, <ref target='Pg095'>95</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his knowledge of hieroglyphics, <ref target='Pg095'>95</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Manka, the Indian, his translations from Sanskrit into Persian, <ref target='Pg149'>149</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Masora, idiom in which it was written, <ref target='Pg277'>277</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Maulána Izzu-d-din Khalid Khani, his translations from Sanskrit into Persian, <ref target='Pg150'>150</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Même</hi>, origin of the French word, <ref target='Pg057'>57</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Menander, his study and cultivation of the Greek language, <ref target='Pg095'>95</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his work on Phenicia, <ref target='Pg095'>95</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Mendaïtes, or Nasoreans, the <q>Book of Adam</q> of the, <ref target='Pg279'>279</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<pb n='410'/><anchor id='Pg410'/> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Ment</hi>, origin of the termination in French adverbs, <ref target='Pg055'>55</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Mescheräks, tribe of the, their present settlements, <ref target='Pg304'>304</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Milton, John, number of words used by, in his works, <ref target='Pg267'>267</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ming-ti, the Emperor of China, allows the introduction of Buddhism into his empire, <ref target='Pg147'>147</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>sends officials to India to study the doctrines of Buddha, <ref target='Pg148'>148</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Missionaries, their importance in elucidating the problem of the dialectical life of language, <ref target='Pg062'>62</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Moallakat, or <q>suspended poems,</q> of the Arabs, <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Moffat, Rev. Robert, on the dialects of Southern Africa, <ref target='Pg064'>64</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Monboddo, Lord, on language as the barrier between man and brutes, quoted, <ref target='Pg024'>24</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his <q>Ancient Metaphysics</q> quoted, <ref target='Pg160'>160</ref> and <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Mongolian dialects, entering a new phase of grammatical life, <ref target='Pg064'>64</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Mongolian class of languages, <ref target='Pg296'>296</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>grammar of, <ref target='Pg323'>323</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Mongols, their original seat, <ref target='Pg296'>296</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>three classes of them, <ref target='Pg296'>296</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>their conquests, <ref target='Pg297'>297</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>dissolution of the empire, <ref target='Pg299'>299</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>their present state, <ref target='Pg300'>300</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>their language, <ref target='Pg300'>300</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Moon</hi>, antiquity of the word, <ref target='Pg016'>16</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Moravia, devastated by the Mongols, <ref target='Pg299'>299</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Mortal</hi>, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg382'>382</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Much</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Very</hi>, distinction between, <ref target='Pg048'>48</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Muhammed ben Musa, his translation of the Indian treatise on algebra into Arabic, <ref target='Pg149'>149</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Mythology, real nature of, <ref target='Pg021'>21</ref>, <ref target='Pg237'>237</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Nabateans, the, supposed to have been descendants of the Babylonians and Chaldeans, <ref target='Pg279'>279</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the work of Kuthami on <q>Nabatean Agriculture,</q> <ref target='Pg280'>280</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>National languages, origin of, <ref target='Pg064'>64</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Nature, immutability of, in all her works, <ref target='Pg042'>42</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Dr. Whewell quoted, <ref target='Pg042'>42</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Nebuchadnezzar, his name stamped on all the bricks made during his reign, <ref target='Pg283'>283</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Neo-Latin dialects, <ref target='Pg196'>196</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Νεμέτζιοι, the, of Constantinus Porphyrogeneta, <ref target='Pg091'>91</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Nestorians of Syria, forms and present condition of their language, <ref target='Pg276'>276</ref>, <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Nicopolis, battle of, <ref target='Pg307'>307</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>No</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>nay</hi>, as used by Chaucer, <ref target='Pg225'>225</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Nobili, Roberto de, <ref target='Pg155'>155</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his study of Sanskrit, <ref target='Pg155'>155</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Nogái tribes, history of the, <ref target='Pg303'>303</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Nomad languages, <ref target='Pg290'>290</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>indispensable requirements of a nomad language, <ref target='Pg292'>292</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>wealth of, <ref target='Pg071'>71</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>nomadic tribes and their wars, <ref target='Pg315'>315</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>their languages, <ref target='Pg316'>316</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Nominalism and Realism, controversy between, in the Middle Ages, <ref target='Pg022'>22</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Norman words in the English language, proportion of, to Saxon words, <ref target='Pg084'>84</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Norway, poetry of, <ref target='Pg192'>192</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the <hi rend='italic'>hliod</hi> or <hi rend='italic'>quida</hi>,<ref target='Pg193'>193</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the two Eddas, <ref target='Pg191'>191-194</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Norwegian language, stagnation of the, <ref target='Pg070'>70</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Number of known languages, <ref target='Pg035'>35</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Obsolete words and senses since the translation of the Bible in 1611, <ref target='Pg045'>45</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Onomatopoieia, theory of, <ref target='Pg358'>358</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ophir of the Bible, <ref target='Pg203'>203</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Origen, his opinion that Hebrew was the primitive language of mankind, <ref target='Pg132'>132</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Origin of language, consideration of the problem of the common, <ref target='Pg326'>326</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<anchor id='index-ormuzd'/> +<l>Ormuzd, the god of the Zoroastrians, mentioned by Plato, <ref target='Pg207'>207</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>discovery of the name Auramazda in the cuneiform inscriptions, <ref target='Pg207'>207</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>origin of the name Auramazda or Ormuzd, <ref target='Pg207'>207</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Os, the, of Ossethi, calling themselves Iron, <ref target='Pg243'>243</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<pb n='411'/><anchor id='Pg411'/> + +<lg> +<l>Oscan language and literature, the <ref target='Pg196'>196</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Osmanli language, the, <ref target='Pg301'>301</ref>, <ref target='Pg306'>306</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ostiakes, dialects of the, <ref target='Pg063'>63</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Owl-glass, stories of, <ref target='Pg260'>260</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Pâli, once the popular dialect of Behar, <ref target='Pg146'>146</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Panætius, the Stoic philosopher at Rome, <ref target='Pg107'>107</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Pânini, Sanskrit grammar of, <ref target='Pg116'>116</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Pantomime, the, and the King, story of, <ref target='Pg368'>368</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Paolino de San Bartolomeo, Fra, first Sanskrit grammar published by, <ref target='Pg142'>142</ref>, <ref target='Pg158'>158</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Paradise, languages supposed by various authors to have been spoken in, <ref target='Pg135'>135</ref>, <ref target='Pg136'>136</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Parsi, period when it was spoken in Persia, <ref target='Pg210'>210</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<anchor id='index-parsis'/> +<l>Parsis, or fire-worshippers, the ancient, <ref target='Pg205'>205</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>their prosperous colony in Bombay, <ref target='Pg205'>205</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>their various emigrations, <ref target='Pg205'>205</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>their ancient language, <ref target='Pg205'>205</ref>, <ref target='Pg210'>210</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Pascatir race, the, <ref target='Pg320'>320</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Pater</hi>, origin of the Latin word, <ref target='Pg057'>57</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Pay, to</hi>, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg124'>124</ref>,</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Pedro, Padre, the missionary at Calicut, <ref target='Pg154'>154</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Pehlevi, or Huzvaresh language, <ref target='Pg210'>210</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Pelasgi, Herodotus on the, <ref target='Pg125'>125</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Dionysius of Halicarnassus on the, <ref target='Pg125'>125</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Percussion</hi>, etymology of, <ref target='Pg053'>53</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Perion, his work on language, <ref target='Pg131'>131</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Permian tribes and language, <ref target='Pg320'>320</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Permic branch of the Finnic class of languages, <ref target='Pg319'>319</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the name of Perm, <ref target='Pg319'>319</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the Permic tribes, <ref target='Pg320'>320</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Persia, origin of the Turkman, or Kisilbash of, <ref target='Pg302'>302</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Persian language, <ref target='Pg083'>83</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>influence of the, over the Turkish language, <ref target='Pg083'>83</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the ancient Persian language. <hi rend='italic'>See</hi> <ref target='index-zend'>Zend</ref>, <ref target='index-zend-avesta'>Zend-avesta</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Persian, subsequent history of Persian, <ref target='Pg210'>210</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Peshito</hi>, meaning of the word, <ref target='Pg276'>276</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Philolaus, the Pythagorean, his guess on the motion of the earth round the sun, <ref target='Pg029'>29</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Philology, comparative, science of, <ref target='Pg031'>31</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>a historical science, <ref target='Pg032'>32</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>aim of the science, <ref target='Pg081'>81</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Phœnician, closely allied to Hebrew, <ref target='Pg280'>280</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Plato, his notion of the origin of the Greek language, <ref target='Pg126'>126</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>on Zoroaster, quoted, <ref target='Pg206'>206</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Plautus, Greek words in the plays of, <ref target='Pg104'>104</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>all his plays mere adaptations of Greek originals, <ref target='Pg104'>104</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Pleiades</hi>, the, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg017'>17</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Poland invaded by the Mongols, <ref target='Pg299'>299</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Polish, oldest specimens of, <ref target='Pg200'>200</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Polybius, on the changes Latin had undergone in his time, <ref target='Pg067'>67</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Pons, Father, his report of the literary treasures of the Brahmans, <ref target='Pg157'>157</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Pott, Professor, his <q>Etymological Researches,</q> <ref target='Pg167'>167</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his advocacy of the polygenetic theory, <ref target='Pg342'>342</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Prâkrit idioms, the, <ref target='Pg146'>146</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Prâtiśâkhyas, the, of the Brahmans, <ref target='Pg116'>116</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Priest</hi>, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg122'>122</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Priscianus, influence of his grammatical work on later ages, <ref target='Pg114'>114</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Protagoras, his attempt to change and improve the language of Homer, <ref target='Pg048'>48</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Provençal, the daughter of Latin, <ref target='Pg171'>171</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>not the mother of French, Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese, <ref target='Pg171'>171</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the earliest Provençal poem, <ref target='Pg196'>196</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Prussian, the old, language and literature of, <ref target='Pg200'>200</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ptolemy, his system of astronomy, although wrong, important to science, <ref target='Pg026'>26</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ptolemy Philadelphus and the Septuagint, <ref target='Pg096'>96</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<pb n='412'/><anchor id='Pg412'/> + +<lg> +<l>Ptōsis, meaning of the word in the language of the Stoics, <ref target='Pg111'>111</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Publius Crassus, his knowledge of the Greek dialects, <ref target='Pg106'>106</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Pushtú, the language of Afghanistan, <ref target='Pg210'>210</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Pythagoras, his travels mythical, <ref target='Pg094'>94</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Pyrrha, original meaning of the name, <ref target='Pg022'>22</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Quatremère on the Ophir of the Bible, <ref target='Pg204'>204</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Quinsy</hi>, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg380'>380</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Quintilian, on the changes Latin had undergone in his time, <ref target='Pg067'>67</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>on the omission of the final <hi rend='italic'>s</hi> in Latin, <ref target='Pg068'>68</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Radical relationship of languages, <ref target='Pg176'>176</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Radicals. <hi rend='italic'>See</hi> <ref target='index-roots'>Roots</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Rask, Erasmus, his studies of Zend, <ref target='Pg167'>167</ref>, <ref target='Pg206'>206</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Raven</hi>, the word, <ref target='Pg362'>362</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Raynouard, his labors in comparative grammar, <ref target='Pg171'>171</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>criticisms of his theory of the Langue Romane, <ref target='Pg171'>171</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Realism and Nominalism, controversy between, in the Middle Ages, <ref target='Pg022'>22</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Regeneration, dialectical, one of the processes which comprise the growth of language, <ref target='Pg058'>58</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Respectable</hi>, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg256'>256</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Reval dialect of Esthonian, <ref target='Pg318'>318</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Rig-Veda, the, quoted, <ref target='Pg088'>88</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Romance languages, their Latin origin, <ref target='Pg170'>170</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>modifications of, <ref target='Pg195'>195</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>their origin in the ancient Italic languages, <ref target='Pg196'>196</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Romane, the Langue, <ref target='Pg171'>171</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Romanese language of the Grisons, <ref target='Pg196'>196</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>translation of the Bible into, <ref target='Pg196'>196</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>lower, or Enghadine, <ref target='Pg196'>196</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Romans, their use of the term Barbarian, <ref target='Pg127'>127</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Rome, Greek generally spoken at, <ref target='Pg101'>101</ref></l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>influence of Greece on Rome <ref target='Pg102'>102</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>changes in the intellectual atmosphere of, caused by Greek civilization, <ref target='Pg106'>106</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the religious life of Rome more Greek than Roman, <ref target='Pg107'>107</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>expulsion of the Greek grammarians and philosophers from Rome, <ref target='Pg108'>108</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>compromise between religion and philosophy, <ref target='Pg108'>108</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>wide interest excited by grammatical studies in Roman society, <ref target='Pg109'>109</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<anchor id='index-roots'/> +<l>Roots or radicals, <ref target='Pg252'>252</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>classes of roots, primary, secondary, and tertiary, <ref target='Pg262'>262-264</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>demonstrative and predicative roots, <ref target='Pg267'>267</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>how many forms of speech may be produced by the free combination of these constituent elements, <ref target='Pg275'>275</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>all languages reducible in the end to roots, <ref target='Pg286'>286</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the radical stage of language, <ref target='Pg287'>287</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>general ideas and roots, <ref target='Pg356'>356</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>origin of roots, <ref target='Pg357'>357</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the bow-wow theory, <ref target='Pg358'>358</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the pooh-pooh theory, <ref target='Pg366'>366</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>natural selection of roots, <ref target='Pg386'>386</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Russia devastated by the Mongols, <ref target='Pg299'>299</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Sabius, a word not found in classical Latin, <ref target='Pg103'>103</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<anchor id='index-saenund'/> +<l>Sænund, Sigfusson, his collection of songs in Iceland, <ref target='Pg193'>193</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Sagard Gabriel, on the languages of the Hurons, quoted, <ref target='Pg062'>62</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Salian poems, the, and later Latin, <ref target='Pg067'>67</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Sálotar, translation of his work on veterinary medicine from Sanskrit into Persian, <ref target='Pg150'>150</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Sanskrit, formation of adjectives in, <ref target='Pg113'>113</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>grammar, <ref target='Pg116'>116</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>similarity between Greek and, <ref target='Pg142'>142</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>importance of the discovery of, <ref target='Pg146'>146</ref>.</l> +<pb n='413'/><anchor id='Pg413'/> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>history of the language, <ref target='Pg146'>146</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>doubts as to its age and authenticity examined, <ref target='Pg147'>147</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>accounts given by writers of various nations who became acquainted with the language and literature of India, <ref target='Pg148'>148</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the Muhammedans in India, and their translations of Sanskrit works into Arabic and Persian, <ref target='Pg149'>149</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>European Missionaries, <ref target='Pg155'>155</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>studies and work of Frederick Schlegel, <ref target='Pg164'>164</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>importance of the discovery of, in the classification of languages, <ref target='Pg172'>172</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>its genealogical relation to Greek and Latin, <ref target='Pg172'>172</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>antiquity of, <ref target='Pg202'>202</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Iranic languages, relation to, <ref target='Pg205'>205</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>formation of the locative in, <ref target='Pg219'>219</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>number of roots in, <ref target='Pg265'>265</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Sassanian dynasty, Persian language of the, <ref target='Pg210'>210</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Saxon language, proportion of Saxon to Norman words in the English language, <ref target='Pg084'>84</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Savage tribes, rapid changes which take place in the languages of, <ref target='Pg044'>44</ref>, <ref target='Pg062'>62</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Scaliger, I. I., his <q>Diatribe de Europæorum Linguis,</q> <ref target='Pg132'>132</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Scandinavian branch of the Teutonic class of languages, <ref target='Pg190'>190</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the East and West Scandinavian races, <ref target='Pg191'>191</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Schlegel, Frederick, his Sanskrit studies, <ref target='Pg164'>164</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his work <q>On the Language and Wisdom of the Indians,</q> <ref target='Pg164'>164</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>how his work was taken up in Germany, <ref target='Pg166'>166</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his view of the origin of language, <ref target='Pg216'>216</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>August W. von, his <q>Indische Bibliothek,</q> <ref target='Pg167'>167</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his criticism of the theory of Raynouard, <ref target='Pg171'>171</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Sciences, uniformity in the history of most, <ref target='Pg014'>14</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the empirical stage, <ref target='Pg015'>15</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Sciences, the necessity that science should answer some practical purpose, <ref target='Pg019'>19</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the classificatory stage, <ref target='Pg025'>25</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the theoretical or metaphysical stage, <ref target='Pg028'>28</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>impulses received by the physical sciences from the philosopher and poet, <ref target='Pg029'>29</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>difference between physical and historical science, <ref target='Pg032'>32</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Scipios, influence of the <q>Cosmopolitan Club</q> at the house of the, <ref target='Pg107'>107</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Scythian words mentioned by Greek writers, <ref target='Pg243'>243</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Semitic family of languages, <ref target='Pg043'>43</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>study of, <ref target='Pg131'>131</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>constituent elements of the, <ref target='Pg272'>272</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>divisions of the Semitic family of speech, <ref target='Pg275'>275</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Aramaic class, <ref target='Pg276'>276</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Hebraic class, <ref target='Pg280'>280</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Arabic class, <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>intimate relations of the three classes to each other, <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Berber dialects, <ref target='Pg282'>282</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the Semitic and Aryan, the only <hi rend='italic'>families</hi> of speech deserving that title, <ref target='Pg282'>282</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>genealogical table, <ref target='Pg396'>396</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Senior</hi>, the title, <ref target='Pg226'>226</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Septuagint, the, and Ptolemy Philadelphus, <ref target='Pg096'>96</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Serpent</hi>, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg380'>380</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Shakespeare, William, total number of words used by, in his plays, <ref target='Pg267'>267</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Siberia, Tungusic tribes of, <ref target='Pg296'>296</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Turkic tribes settled there, in, <ref target='Pg304'>304</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>dialects, <ref target='Pg304'>304</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Sibulla</hi>, meaning of the word, <ref target='Pg103'>103</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Sibylla of Cumæ, oracles of the, written in Greek, <ref target='Pg103'>103</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Sigfusson. <hi rend='italic'>See </hi> <ref target='index-saenund'>Sænund</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Sigismund, the Emperor, and the Bohemian schoolmaster, anecdote of, <ref target='Pg047'>47</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Silesia invaded by the Mongols, <ref target='Pg299'>299</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Sir</hi>, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg226'>226</ref>, <ref target='Pg227'>227</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Siriane tribes, their habitat, <ref target='Pg320'>320</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>their language, <ref target='Pg319'>319</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Sister</hi>, origin of, <ref target='Pg057'>57</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<pb n='414'/><anchor id='Pg414'/> + +<lg> +<l><q>Skalda,</q> the, of Snorri Sturluson, <ref target='Pg193'>193</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Slavonic tribes, their settlement in Moesia, <ref target='Pg196'>196</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>languages, properly so called, <ref target='Pg200'>200</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Slovinian language, the, <ref target='Pg200'>200</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Smith, Adam, his opinion on the origin of language, <ref target='Pg040'>40</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>on the formation of thought and language, quoted, <ref target='Pg371'>371</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Sydney, on the superiority of mankind over brutes, quoted, <ref target='Pg348'>348</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<anchor id='index-snorri'/> +<l>Snorri Sturluson, his prose Edda, <ref target='Pg193'>193</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his <q>Heimskringla,</q> <ref target='Pg193'>193</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his <q>Skalda,</q> <ref target='Pg193'>193</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Solomon's fleet of Tharshish, <ref target='Pg202'>202</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Song-yun, the Chinese pilgrim to India, his travels, <ref target='Pg149'>149</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Sound, small number of names formed by the imitation of, <ref target='Pg365'>365</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Spec</hi>, offshoots of the root, <ref target='Pg257'>257</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Species</hi>, origin of the Latin, <ref target='Pg260'>260</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Squirrel</hi>, origin of the name, <ref target='Pg365'>365</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Stewart, Dugald, his opinion on the origin of language, <ref target='Pg041'>41</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his doubts as to the age and authenticity of Sanskrit, <ref target='Pg147'>147</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his view of the affinity of Greek and Sanskrit, <ref target='Pg164'>164</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>on the origin of language, quoted, <ref target='Pg343'>343</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Stoics, philosophy of the, in Rome, <ref target='Pg107'>107</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Strabo on the Barbarians, <ref target='Pg125'>125</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Sturluson. <hi rend='italic'>See</hi> <ref target='index-snorri'>Snorri</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Sugar</hi>, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg364'>364</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Swedish language, growth of the, <ref target='Pg071'>71</ref>, <ref target='Pg191'>191</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Syria, origin of the Turks of, <ref target='Pg306'>306</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Syriac language, date of the translation of the Bible into the, <ref target='Pg276'>276</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>meaning of Peshito, <ref target='Pg276'>276</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>decline and present position of the language, <ref target='Pg276'>276</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Talmud of Jerusalem, and that of Babylon, literary idiom of the Jews in the, <ref target='Pg277'>277</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Targums, language in which they were written, <ref target='Pg277'>277</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Targums, most celebrated of them, <ref target='Pg277'>277</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><q>Tarikhu-l-Hind,</q> the, of Al Birúni, <ref target='Pg150'>150</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Tatar tribes, <ref target='Pg297'>297</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>terror caused by the name, <ref target='Pg297'>297</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the Golden Horde, <ref target='Pg298'>298</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Tataric language, <ref target='Pg297'>297</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>sometimes used in the same sense as Turanian, <ref target='Pg297'>297</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Tavastian dialect of Finnic, <ref target='Pg318'>318</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Terminations, grammatical, Horne Tooke's remarks on, quoted, <ref target='Pg251'>251</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Terminology, grammatical of the Greeks and Hindus, coincidences between the, <ref target='Pg115'>115</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Testament, the New, translated into Persian, <ref target='Pg151'>151</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Old, number of words in the, <ref target='Pg267'>267</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Teutonic class of languages, <ref target='Pg177'>177</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the English language, a branch of, <ref target='Pg080'>80</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Tharshish, Solomon's fleet of, <ref target='Pg202'>202</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Themistocles, his acquaintance with the Persian language, <ref target='Pg093'>93</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Thommerel, M., on the proportion Saxon words bear to Norman in the English language, <ref target='Pg084'>84</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Thracians, ancient authors on the, <ref target='Pg126'>126</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Thunder</hi>, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg364'>364</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Tiberius Gracchus, his knowledge of Greek, <ref target='Pg103'>103</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Tiberius the Emperor, and the grammarians, anecdote of, <ref target='Pg047'>47</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Tibetan language, how adjectives are formed in the, <ref target='Pg113'>113</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Timur, Mongolian empire of, <ref target='Pg299'>299</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Tooke, Horne, on grammatical terminations, quoted, <ref target='Pg251'>251</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his answer to the interjectional theory of roots, <ref target='Pg367'>367</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Torgod Mongols, the, <ref target='Pg300'>300</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Trade first encouraged the profession of interpreters, <ref target='Pg093'>93</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Turanian family of languages, <ref target='Pg043'>43</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>origin of term Turanian, <ref target='Pg238'>238</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Turanian races, <ref target='Pg243'>243</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Turanian names mentioned by Greek writers, <ref target='Pg243'>243</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>component parts of Turanian speech, <ref target='Pg272'>272</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Tungusic idioms, new phase of grammatical life of the, <ref target='Pg064'>64</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<pb n='415'/><anchor id='Pg415'/> +<lg> +<l>Tungusic class of languages, <ref target='Pg296'>296</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>geographical limits of the, <ref target='Pg296'>296</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>grammar of, <ref target='Pg323'>323</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Turanian family of languages, <ref target='Pg288'>288</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>a terminational or agglutinative family of languages, <ref target='Pg288'>288</ref>, <ref target='Pg291'>291</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>divisions of the Turanian family, <ref target='Pg289'>289</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the name Turanian, <ref target='Pg289'>289</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>characteristic features of the Turanian languages, <ref target='Pg290'>290</ref>, <ref target='Pg291'>291</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>account of the languages of the Turanian family, <ref target='Pg296'>296</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>genealogical table, <ref target='Pg397'>397</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Turkic class of languages, <ref target='Pg300'>300</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>grammar, <ref target='Pg309'>309</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>profuse system of conjugation, <ref target='Pg323'>323</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Turkish language, influence of imported words over the whole native aspect of the, <ref target='Pg083'>83</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>two classes of vowels in, <ref target='Pg295'>295</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>ingenuity of Turkish grammar, <ref target='Pg308'>308</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>its advance towards inflectional forms, <ref target='Pg337'>337</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Turkman, or Kisil-bash, origin of the, of Persia, <ref target='Pg302'>302</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Turks, history of the, <ref target='Pg301'>301</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>origin of the Turks of Asia Minor and Syria, <ref target='Pg306'>306</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>origin and progress of the Osmanlis, <ref target='Pg306'>306</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>spread of the Osmanli dialect, <ref target='Pg306'>306</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Turner, Sharon, on the proportion of Norman to Saxon words in the English language, <ref target='Pg084'>84</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Turvasa, the Turanian, <ref target='Pg243'>243</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Twenty, origin of the word, <ref target='Pg052'>52</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ugric branch of the Finnic class of languages, <ref target='Pg320'>320</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ulfilas, Bishop, notice of him and of his Gothic translation of the Bible, <ref target='Pg181'>181</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Umbrian language and literature, <ref target='Pg197'>197</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Upanishads, the, translated from Sanskrit into Persian by Dárá, <ref target='Pg154'>154</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>translated into French by Anquetil Duperron, <ref target='Pg154'>154</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Uralic languages, <ref target='Pg315'>315</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Uran'hat tribes, on the Chulym, <ref target='Pg304'>304</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Urdu-zeban, the proper name of Hindustání, <ref target='Pg316'>316</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Usbeks, history of the, <ref target='Pg302'>302</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Vâch, the goddess of speech, her verses quoted from the Rig-Veda, <ref target='Pg088'>88</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Varro, de Re Rust, on Mago's Carthaginian agricultural work, quoted, <ref target='Pg095'>95</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his work on the Latin language, <ref target='Pg109'>109</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>appointed by Cæsar librarian to the Greek and Latin library in Rome, <ref target='Pg110'>110</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Vasco da Gama, takes a missionary to Calicut, <ref target='Pg154'>154</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Vedas, the, <ref target='Pg116'>116</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>differences between the dialect of the Vedas and later Sanskrit, <ref target='Pg116'>116</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>objections of the Brahmans to allow the Vedas to be translated, <ref target='Pg152'>152</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>story of Feizi, <ref target='Pg152'>152</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Verbs, formation of the terminations of, in the Aryan dialects, <ref target='Pg222'>222</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>modern formations, <ref target='Pg222'>222</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Very</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>much</hi>, distinction between, <ref target='Pg048'>48</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Vibhakti, in Sanskrit grammar, <ref target='Pg116'>116</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Voguls, the, <ref target='Pg320'>320</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Votiakes, idiom of the, <ref target='Pg319'>319</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>habitat of the, <ref target='Pg320'>320</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Vyâkarana, Sanskrit name for grammar, <ref target='Pg116'>116</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Wallachian language, the, <ref target='Pg195'>195</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Wends, language of the, <ref target='Pg201'>201</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Whewell, Dr., on the science of language, <ref target='Pg038'>38</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Wilkins, Mr., on the affinity between Sanskrit and Greek, <ref target='Pg160'>160</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Windic, or Slavonic languages, <ref target='Pg199'>199</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>divisions and subdivisions of, <ref target='Pg199'>199</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Witsen, Nicholas, the Dutch traveller, his collection of words, <ref target='Pg136'>136</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +</lg> + +<pb n='416'/><anchor id='Pg416'/> + +<lg> +<l>Xavier, Francis, his organization of the preaching of the Gospel in India, <ref target='Pg154'>154</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his gift of tongues, <ref target='Pg154'>154</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Yakuts, tribe of the, <ref target='Pg304'>304</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>dialect of the, <ref target='Pg305'>305</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Yea</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Yes</hi>, as used by Chaucer, <ref target='Pg225'>225</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<anchor id='index-zend'/> +<l>Zend, Rask's studies of, <ref target='Pg167'>167</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Burnouf's, <ref target='Pg168'>168</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<anchor id='index-zend-avesta'/> +<l>Zend-avesta, the, <ref target='Pg167'>167</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>antiquity of, <ref target='Pg205'>205</ref>, <ref target='Pg206'>206</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the words <hi rend='italic'>Zend</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Zend-avesta</hi>, <ref target='Pg205'>205</ref> <hi rend='italic'>note</hi>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Anquetil's translation of, <ref target='Pg206'>206</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Rask and Burnouf's labors, <ref target='Pg206'>206</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Zend-avesta, authority of the Zend-avesta for the antiquity of the word Arya, <ref target='Pg239'>239</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Zenodotus, his restoration of the article before proper names in Homer, <ref target='Pg099'>99</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>the first to recognize the dual, <ref target='Pg099'>99</ref>. </l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Zeus, original meaning of the word, <ref target='Pg021'>21</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Zoroaster, or Zarathustra, his writings (the Zend-avesta) translated into Greek, <ref target='Pg096'>96</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>translated by Anquetil Duperron, <ref target='Pg168'>168</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>his Gâthâs, or songs, <ref target='Pg209'>209</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>age in which he lived, <ref target='Pg209'>209</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>not the same as Jaradashti in the Veda, <ref target='Pg209'>209</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Zoroastrians. <hi rend='italic'>See</hi> <ref target='index-parsis'>Parsis</ref>.</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>original seat of the, <ref target='Pg248'>248</ref>.</l> +</lg> + +</div> + +</body> +<back rend="page-break-before: right"> + <div id="footnotes"> + <index index="toc" /> + <index index="pdf" /> + <head>Footnotes</head> + <divGen type="footnotes"/> + </div> + <div rend="page-break-before: right"> + <divGen type="pgfooter" /> + </div> +</back> +</text> +</TEI.2> |