[1]Σίβυλλα δὲ μαινομένῳ στόματι καθ’ Ἡράκλειτον ἀγέλαστα καὶ ἀκαλλώπιστα καὶ ἀμύριστα φθεγγομένη χιλίων ἐτῶν ἐξικνεῖται τῇ φωνῇ διὰ τὸν θεόν.—Plut.de Pyth. Orac.p. 397 et p. 627. Wytt. Lapalle’sHeraclitus, p. 29.
[1]Σίβυλλα δὲ μαινομένῳ στόματι καθ’ Ἡράκλειτον ἀγέλαστα καὶ ἀκαλλώπιστα καὶ ἀμύριστα φθεγγομένη χιλίων ἐτῶν ἐξικνεῖται τῇ φωνῇ διὰ τὸν θεόν.—Plut.de Pyth. Orac.p. 397 et p. 627. Wytt. Lapalle’sHeraclitus, p. 29.
[2]Sir John Stoddart. “Bei allem was Sprache heissen soll, wird schlechterdings nichts weiter beabsichtiget, als die Bezeichnung des Gedankens.”—Fichte,Von der Sprachfähigkeit und dem Ursprunge der Sprache. “Die Sprache ist die Aeusserung des denkenden Geistes in articulirten Lauten.”—Heyse,System der Sprachwissenschaft, S. 35.
[2]Sir John Stoddart. “Bei allem was Sprache heissen soll, wird schlechterdings nichts weiter beabsichtiget, als die Bezeichnung des Gedankens.”—Fichte,Von der Sprachfähigkeit und dem Ursprunge der Sprache. “Die Sprache ist die Aeusserung des denkenden Geistes in articulirten Lauten.”—Heyse,System der Sprachwissenschaft, S. 35.
[3]Grimm,Über den Ursprung der Sprache, S. 11.
[3]Grimm,Über den Ursprung der Sprache, S. 11.
[4]Grimm, s. 52.
[4]Grimm, s. 52.
[5]Renan,De l’Origine du Langage. Deux. éd. p. 69.
[5]Renan,De l’Origine du Langage. Deux. éd. p. 69.
[6]Bunsen,On the Philosophy of Universal History, ii. 126.
[6]Bunsen,On the Philosophy of Universal History, ii. 126.
[7]Humboldt’sCosmos, ii. 107-109, ed. Sabine.
[7]Humboldt’sCosmos, ii. 107-109, ed. Sabine.
[8]Philology has been well defined as the cognitio cogniti, and Comparative Grammar, (the branch of Philology which occupies itself with the study of the birth, the development, and the decadence of various languages, together with their divergences and affinities), has deserved the title ofΘριγκὸς μαθημάτων φιλολογικῶν, “the coping-stone of philological inquiries.” SeeScience Comparative des Langues, par Louis Benloew. Paris, 1858.
[8]Philology has been well defined as the cognitio cogniti, and Comparative Grammar, (the branch of Philology which occupies itself with the study of the birth, the development, and the decadence of various languages, together with their divergences and affinities), has deserved the title ofΘριγκὸς μαθημάτων φιλολογικῶν, “the coping-stone of philological inquiries.” SeeScience Comparative des Langues, par Louis Benloew. Paris, 1858.
[9]Thus, though Zend and Sanskrit are the oldest languages of the Indo-European family, they are offsets of anolderprimitive one. “Among other evidences of this, may be mentioned the changes that words had already undergone in Zend and Sanscrit from the original form they had in the parent tongue; as in the number ‘twenty,’ which being in the Zend ‘visaiti,’ and in Sanscrit ‘vinsaiti,’ shews that they have thrown off the ‘d’ of the original ‘dva,’ two.”—Sir G. Wilkinson in Rawlinson’sHerod. i. p. 280.
[9]Thus, though Zend and Sanskrit are the oldest languages of the Indo-European family, they are offsets of anolderprimitive one. “Among other evidences of this, may be mentioned the changes that words had already undergone in Zend and Sanscrit from the original form they had in the parent tongue; as in the number ‘twenty,’ which being in the Zend ‘visaiti,’ and in Sanscrit ‘vinsaiti,’ shews that they have thrown off the ‘d’ of the original ‘dva,’ two.”—Sir G. Wilkinson in Rawlinson’sHerod. i. p. 280.
[10]Charma,Essai sur le Langage, p. 60.
[10]Charma,Essai sur le Langage, p. 60.
[11]“Ici comme ailleurs on a commencé par bâtir des systèmes, au lieu de se borner à l’observation de faits.”—Abel Rémusat.
[11]“Ici comme ailleurs on a commencé par bâtir des systèmes, au lieu de se borner à l’observation de faits.”—Abel Rémusat.
[12]Bunsen,Phil. of Un. Hist.i. 40. The philosophers who held these views were called “Analogists,” while those who leaned to the conventional origin of language were styled “Anomalists.” But Plato and Aristotle admit the existence of both principles, and have written on the subject with a depth of philosophical insight, which, in spite of their defective knowledge, has never been surpassed. See Humboldt’sCosmos, i. 41, ii. 261.
[12]Bunsen,Phil. of Un. Hist.i. 40. The philosophers who held these views were called “Analogists,” while those who leaned to the conventional origin of language were styled “Anomalists.” But Plato and Aristotle admit the existence of both principles, and have written on the subject with a depth of philosophical insight, which, in spite of their defective knowledge, has never been surpassed. See Humboldt’sCosmos, i. 41, ii. 261.
[13]Plato’sCratylus, p. 423, et passim; and Schleiermacher’s Introduction. The great authority on the ancient views of philology is Lersch,Sprachphilosophie der Alten. (Bonn, 1838-1841.) The question which agitated the schools was,φύσει τὰ ὀνόματα ἢ θέσει; it was generally decided in favour of the “Analogists,” though often for frivolous reasons. See Aul. Gell.Noct. Att.x. 4. (Renan, p. 137.) Cf. Xen.Mem.iv. 6. 1. Arrian,Epict.i. 17, ii. 10.Marc. Aur.iii. 2; v. 8; x. 8. These views of themimeticcharacter of words (Arist.Rhet.iii. 1, 2), and theirintrinsicconnection with things, did not seem to be much disturbed by the fact of the multiplicity of languages, although this fact led Aristotle to place the conventional element first. The very word βάρβαρος implies a lofty contempt for all languages except Greek, and traces of a similar contempt may be found in the vocabulary of many nations. Cf. Timtim, Zamzummim, &c., Renan, p. 178. Pictet’sOrigines Indo-Eur.p. 56, seqq. (1 Cor. xiv. 11.)
[13]Plato’sCratylus, p. 423, et passim; and Schleiermacher’s Introduction. The great authority on the ancient views of philology is Lersch,Sprachphilosophie der Alten. (Bonn, 1838-1841.) The question which agitated the schools was,φύσει τὰ ὀνόματα ἢ θέσει; it was generally decided in favour of the “Analogists,” though often for frivolous reasons. See Aul. Gell.Noct. Att.x. 4. (Renan, p. 137.) Cf. Xen.Mem.iv. 6. 1. Arrian,Epict.i. 17, ii. 10.Marc. Aur.iii. 2; v. 8; x. 8. These views of themimeticcharacter of words (Arist.Rhet.iii. 1, 2), and theirintrinsicconnection with things, did not seem to be much disturbed by the fact of the multiplicity of languages, although this fact led Aristotle to place the conventional element first. The very word βάρβαρος implies a lofty contempt for all languages except Greek, and traces of a similar contempt may be found in the vocabulary of many nations. Cf. Timtim, Zamzummim, &c., Renan, p. 178. Pictet’sOrigines Indo-Eur.p. 56, seqq. (1 Cor. xiv. 11.)
[14]ὃς ἂν τὰ ὀνόματα ἐπίστηται ἐπίστασθαι καὶ τὰ πράγματα. Plato,Crat.435,c.In proof that Platodidrecognise both elements of language—the absolute and the conventional, seeCrat.435,c., andPhilol. Trans.iii. 137. For an able exposition of theCratylus, see Dr. Donaldson’sNew Crat.p. 93, seqq.
[14]ὃς ἂν τὰ ὀνόματα ἐπίστηται ἐπίστασθαι καὶ τὰ πράγματα. Plato,Crat.435,c.In proof that Platodidrecognise both elements of language—the absolute and the conventional, seeCrat.435,c., andPhilol. Trans.iii. 137. For an able exposition of theCratylus, see Dr. Donaldson’sNew Crat.p. 93, seqq.
[15]Herodot. ii. 2.
[15]Herodot. ii. 2.
[16]Raumer,Gesch. der Hohenstaufen, iii. 491, quoted by Baehr,Herod.l. c. For some other theories on the primitive language, see Cardinal Wiseman’sLectures on Science, i. 19. Becanus supposed seriously that Low Dutch was spoken in Paradise.Hermathena, lib. ix. p. 204. “That children naturally speak Hebrew,” is one of the vulgar errors which had to be exploded even in the time of Sir T. Browne.Vulg. Err.v. ch. 26. When James IV. of Scotland repeated the experiment of Psammetichus, the infants were shut up with a dumb man, and spoke Hebrew spontaneously! Basque, Swedish, Russ, &c., have all had their advocates. Charma,Essai sur le Langage, p. 242, seqq. Leibnitz,Lettre à M. de Sparvenfeld, § 8.
[16]Raumer,Gesch. der Hohenstaufen, iii. 491, quoted by Baehr,Herod.l. c. For some other theories on the primitive language, see Cardinal Wiseman’sLectures on Science, i. 19. Becanus supposed seriously that Low Dutch was spoken in Paradise.Hermathena, lib. ix. p. 204. “That children naturally speak Hebrew,” is one of the vulgar errors which had to be exploded even in the time of Sir T. Browne.Vulg. Err.v. ch. 26. When James IV. of Scotland repeated the experiment of Psammetichus, the infants were shut up with a dumb man, and spoke Hebrew spontaneously! Basque, Swedish, Russ, &c., have all had their advocates. Charma,Essai sur le Langage, p. 242, seqq. Leibnitz,Lettre à M. de Sparvenfeld, § 8.
[17]Renan, p. 147.
[17]Renan, p. 147.
[18]There are some noble remarks to this effect in Schlegel’sPhilosophische Vorlesungen.Wien. 1830.Hebrew scholars will readily remember cases of the importance attached by the sacred writers to the meresoundof words; a remarkable instance may be seen in Jer. i. 11, 12, and a curious play on sounds occurs in the second verse of Genesis.
[18]There are some noble remarks to this effect in Schlegel’sPhilosophische Vorlesungen.Wien. 1830.Hebrew scholars will readily remember cases of the importance attached by the sacred writers to the meresoundof words; a remarkable instance may be seen in Jer. i. 11, 12, and a curious play on sounds occurs in the second verse of Genesis.
[19]Grimm, s. 12.
[19]Grimm, s. 12.
[20]“I am by no means clear that the dog may not have an analogon of words.”—Coleridge. Similarly Plato attributes aδιάλεκτοςto animals, adducing some very interesting proofs. See Clemens Alexandr.Strom.i. 21, § 413. See, too, Thomson’sPassions of Animals. “They also know, and reason not contemptibly.”—Milton.
[20]“I am by no means clear that the dog may not have an analogon of words.”—Coleridge. Similarly Plato attributes aδιάλεκτοςto animals, adducing some very interesting proofs. See Clemens Alexandr.Strom.i. 21, § 413. See, too, Thomson’sPassions of Animals. “They also know, and reason not contemptibly.”—Milton.
[21]μέροπες βροτοί.—Homer, passim.
[21]μέροπες βροτοί.—Homer, passim.
[22]As in the instance of Balaam.—Numb. 22. Cf. Tibull. ii. v. 78. Hom.Il.τ. 407, &c.
[22]As in the instance of Balaam.—Numb. 22. Cf. Tibull. ii. v. 78. Hom.Il.τ. 407, &c.
[23]Dr. Latham points out that this statement requires modification; e.g., it is doubtful whether ahowl, and not a bark, is not the organic and instinctive sound uttered by dogs. (Encycl. Brit.Art.Language.) Still we do not anticipate that any one will dispute the general proposition. See Heyse,System der Sprachwissenschaft, § 25.
[23]Dr. Latham points out that this statement requires modification; e.g., it is doubtful whether ahowl, and not a bark, is not the organic and instinctive sound uttered by dogs. (Encycl. Brit.Art.Language.) Still we do not anticipate that any one will dispute the general proposition. See Heyse,System der Sprachwissenschaft, § 25.
[24]Grimm, 13, 14. “Language,” he adds (p. 17), “can only be compared to the cries of animals, in respect that both are subjected to certain physical conditions of organism.”
[24]Grimm, 13, 14. “Language,” he adds (p. 17), “can only be compared to the cries of animals, in respect that both are subjected to certain physical conditions of organism.”
[25]“On a très judicieusement remarqué sur celle-ci,” says M. Nodier, “que la seule induction qui en résultât naturellement, fort concluante pour la langue primitive et immodifiable des chèvres ne prouvoit rien en faveur de la première langue de l’homme; puisque les chèvres formoient elles-mêmes d’une manière très-distincte les deux articulations dont ces enfants avoient composé leur étroit vocabulaire.” Sir Gardner Wilkinson discredits the whole story, and supposes that it originated among the Greek ciceroni in Egypt, because he thinks that children, unless artificially instructed, would not have been able to get beyond the labial sound “be.” (Rawlinson’sHerodotus, i. 251.) Surely this is merely a begging of the question. The fact that the inference from the experiment was one unfavourable to the national vanity of the Egyptians, is only one of the reasons which induce us to credit its reality. Larcher (ad loc.) rightly regards theοςas merely the Greek termination.
[25]“On a très judicieusement remarqué sur celle-ci,” says M. Nodier, “que la seule induction qui en résultât naturellement, fort concluante pour la langue primitive et immodifiable des chèvres ne prouvoit rien en faveur de la première langue de l’homme; puisque les chèvres formoient elles-mêmes d’une manière très-distincte les deux articulations dont ces enfants avoient composé leur étroit vocabulaire.” Sir Gardner Wilkinson discredits the whole story, and supposes that it originated among the Greek ciceroni in Egypt, because he thinks that children, unless artificially instructed, would not have been able to get beyond the labial sound “be.” (Rawlinson’sHerodotus, i. 251.) Surely this is merely a begging of the question. The fact that the inference from the experiment was one unfavourable to the national vanity of the Egyptians, is only one of the reasons which induce us to credit its reality. Larcher (ad loc.) rightly regards theοςas merely the Greek termination.
[26]“Mutum et turpe pecus.”—Hor.Sat.i. 3. 99. Similar views are to be found in Diod. Sic. i. 1; Vitruv.Archit.ii. 1. “Thrown as it were by chance on a confused and savage land, an orphan abandoned by the unknown hand that had produced him.”—Volney. Epicurus thought that men spoke just as dogs bark,φυσικῶς κινούμενοι.
[26]“Mutum et turpe pecus.”—Hor.Sat.i. 3. 99. Similar views are to be found in Diod. Sic. i. 1; Vitruv.Archit.ii. 1. “Thrown as it were by chance on a confused and savage land, an orphan abandoned by the unknown hand that had produced him.”—Volney. Epicurus thought that men spoke just as dogs bark,φυσικῶς κινούμενοι.
[27]Lucret. v. 1027-1089. The whole passage is one of remarkable beauty and ingenuity. Neither Epicurus nor Lucretius excluded altogether the innate element; v. Diog. Laert. x. 75, sq. Lucretius rightly regards language as no less natural than gesticulation, and so might have taught a lesson to Reid and Dugald Stewart. See Fleming’sVocab. of Philosophy, s. v.Language. The whole theory is stated and ridiculed by Lactantius,Institt. Divv.vi. 10.
[27]Lucret. v. 1027-1089. The whole passage is one of remarkable beauty and ingenuity. Neither Epicurus nor Lucretius excluded altogether the innate element; v. Diog. Laert. x. 75, sq. Lucretius rightly regards language as no less natural than gesticulation, and so might have taught a lesson to Reid and Dugald Stewart. See Fleming’sVocab. of Philosophy, s. v.Language. The whole theory is stated and ridiculed by Lactantius,Institt. Divv.vi. 10.
[28]He began“In murmurs which his first endeavoring tongueCaught infant-like from the far-foamèd sands.”An extremely curious Esthonian legend (the only one which Grimm has discovered bearing any resemblance to the Babel-dispersion) seems to involve the same conception. God, seeing that population was too crowded, determined to disperse men, by giving to each nation a distinct tongue. Accordingly, he placed on the fire a caldron full of water, and made the different races successively approach, who appropriated respectively the various sounds of the hissing and singing water.—Grimm, p. 28. Others have compared with it the Mexican legend about the doves. See Winer,Biblisches Realwörterb.s. v.Sprache.
[28]He began
“In murmurs which his first endeavoring tongueCaught infant-like from the far-foamèd sands.”
“In murmurs which his first endeavoring tongueCaught infant-like from the far-foamèd sands.”
“In murmurs which his first endeavoring tongue
Caught infant-like from the far-foamèd sands.”
An extremely curious Esthonian legend (the only one which Grimm has discovered bearing any resemblance to the Babel-dispersion) seems to involve the same conception. God, seeing that population was too crowded, determined to disperse men, by giving to each nation a distinct tongue. Accordingly, he placed on the fire a caldron full of water, and made the different races successively approach, who appropriated respectively the various sounds of the hissing and singing water.—Grimm, p. 28. Others have compared with it the Mexican legend about the doves. See Winer,Biblisches Realwörterb.s. v.Sprache.
[29]Spenser’sFaërie Queen.
[29]Spenser’sFaërie Queen.
[30]For assertions of the conventional character of language, see Arist.περὶ Ἑρμηνείας, ii. 1. Plato,Crat.ad in. Harris,Hermes, iii. 1. Locke, iii. 1-8. Fénelon,Lettre sur les occupations de l’Acad.§ 3. (These are quoted at length by Charma, p. 208.) Smith,Theory of the Moral Sentiments, ii. 364. Grimm, 39, 40. Lersch,passim.
[30]For assertions of the conventional character of language, see Arist.περὶ Ἑρμηνείας, ii. 1. Plato,Crat.ad in. Harris,Hermes, iii. 1. Locke, iii. 1-8. Fénelon,Lettre sur les occupations de l’Acad.§ 3. (These are quoted at length by Charma, p. 208.) Smith,Theory of the Moral Sentiments, ii. 364. Grimm, 39, 40. Lersch,passim.
[31]Renan, p. 78.
[31]Renan, p. 78.
[32]See Wiseman, p. 54. This theory of the development of human language required the supposition of an indefinite period of human existence; but even if this be freely admitted, it is impossible to prove thefirst stepby which unarticulated sounds, themerely passiveechoes of blind instincts or outward phenomena, could develop into the expression of thought. See Bunsen, ii. 76. It would have been marvellous indeed, if man had by the mere possession of vocal cries, not differing from those of animals, been able to raise himself from the utterances of instinct and appetite to express the emotions of admiration, hope, and love. See Nodier,Notions, p. 14.
[32]See Wiseman, p. 54. This theory of the development of human language required the supposition of an indefinite period of human existence; but even if this be freely admitted, it is impossible to prove thefirst stepby which unarticulated sounds, themerely passiveechoes of blind instincts or outward phenomena, could develop into the expression of thought. See Bunsen, ii. 76. It would have been marvellous indeed, if man had by the mere possession of vocal cries, not differing from those of animals, been able to raise himself from the utterances of instinct and appetite to express the emotions of admiration, hope, and love. See Nodier,Notions, p. 14.
[33]Bunsen, ii. 130.
[33]Bunsen, ii. 130.
[34]Thus words and phrases repeatedly acquire a conventional meaning for a generation, and then recur to their old sense. Almost every sect, every profession, and even every family, have certain words in use to which they attach a peculiar and special meaning, which is sometimes unintelligible to others. M. Cousin has been unable to discover the meaning which the Port-Royalists attached to the word “machine.” See Charma, p. 209.
[34]Thus words and phrases repeatedly acquire a conventional meaning for a generation, and then recur to their old sense. Almost every sect, every profession, and even every family, have certain words in use to which they attach a peculiar and special meaning, which is sometimes unintelligible to others. M. Cousin has been unable to discover the meaning which the Port-Royalists attached to the word “machine.” See Charma, p. 209.
[35]Wilhelm von Humboldt,Lettre à M. Abel Rémusat. Paris, 1827.
[35]Wilhelm von Humboldt,Lettre à M. Abel Rémusat. Paris, 1827.
[36]Grimm, § 28.
[36]Grimm, § 28.
[37]In the following observations, I quote the thoughts of M. Renan, pp. 81-83. I have not used inverted commas, because I have often transposed and abbreviated his actual words. Very similar are the excellent remarks of Nodier, which are too apposite to be omitted. “On ne me soupçonnera pas d’être d’assez mauvais goût pour avoir attendu à substituer mes théories aux faits de révélation.... Je crois fermement que la parole a été donnée à l’homme, comme je le crois de toutes les facultés que la création a réparti entre les créatures. Le seul point sur lequel j’ose différer des casuistes du son littéral, c’est que ce don ne me paroît pas avoir consisté dans la communication d’un systèmelexicologique tout fait, &c.”—Notions de Linguistique, p. 9.
[37]In the following observations, I quote the thoughts of M. Renan, pp. 81-83. I have not used inverted commas, because I have often transposed and abbreviated his actual words. Very similar are the excellent remarks of Nodier, which are too apposite to be omitted. “On ne me soupçonnera pas d’être d’assez mauvais goût pour avoir attendu à substituer mes théories aux faits de révélation.... Je crois fermement que la parole a été donnée à l’homme, comme je le crois de toutes les facultés que la création a réparti entre les créatures. Le seul point sur lequel j’ose différer des casuistes du son littéral, c’est que ce don ne me paroît pas avoir consisté dans la communication d’un systèmelexicologique tout fait, &c.”—Notions de Linguistique, p. 9.
[38]A beautiful illustration of Herder’s will help to show our meaning. “Observe,” he says, “this tree with its vigorous trunk, its magnificent crown of verdure, its branches, its foliage, its flowers, its fruits, raising itself upon its roots as on a throne. Seized with admiration and astonishment, you exclaim, ‘It is divine, divine!’ Now observe this little seed; see it hidden in the earth, then pushing out a feeble germ, covering itself with buds, clothing itself with leaves; you will again exclaim, ‘It is divine!’ but in a manner more worthy and more intelligent.”
[38]A beautiful illustration of Herder’s will help to show our meaning. “Observe,” he says, “this tree with its vigorous trunk, its magnificent crown of verdure, its branches, its foliage, its flowers, its fruits, raising itself upon its roots as on a throne. Seized with admiration and astonishment, you exclaim, ‘It is divine, divine!’ Now observe this little seed; see it hidden in the earth, then pushing out a feeble germ, covering itself with buds, clothing itself with leaves; you will again exclaim, ‘It is divine!’ but in a manner more worthy and more intelligent.”
[39]Nothing has been more fatally prejudicial to the progress of science than a theological bias in its votaries; and nothing more fatal to the peace of true discoverers than its ignorant tyranny. Adelung shows true wisdom in prefacing hisMithridateswith the statement, “Ich habe keine Lieblingsmeinung, keine Hypothese zum Grunde zu legen. Noah’s Arche ist mir eine Verschlossene Burg, und Babylon’s Schutt bleibt vor mir völlig in seiner Ruhe.”
[39]Nothing has been more fatally prejudicial to the progress of science than a theological bias in its votaries; and nothing more fatal to the peace of true discoverers than its ignorant tyranny. Adelung shows true wisdom in prefacing hisMithridateswith the statement, “Ich habe keine Lieblingsmeinung, keine Hypothese zum Grunde zu legen. Noah’s Arche ist mir eine Verschlossene Burg, und Babylon’s Schutt bleibt vor mir völlig in seiner Ruhe.”
[40]It seems to me, however, that Grimm’s special arguments on this subject are weak (p. 26); he is clearly right in pointing out the futility of such conjectures as those of Lessing, that language was made known to man by intercourse with intermediate spirits. (Lessing,Sämmtl. Schriften, Bd. 10.)
[40]It seems to me, however, that Grimm’s special arguments on this subject are weak (p. 26); he is clearly right in pointing out the futility of such conjectures as those of Lessing, that language was made known to man by intercourse with intermediate spirits. (Lessing,Sämmtl. Schriften, Bd. 10.)
[41]Préface aux Œuvres Philos. de Maine de Biran, iv. p. xv.
[41]Préface aux Œuvres Philos. de Maine de Biran, iv. p. xv.
[42]Charma,Essai sur le Langage, p. 129.
[42]Charma,Essai sur le Langage, p. 129.
[43]Dr. Whewell,Hist. of Ind. Science, iii. 504. A host of eminent authorities, from Bacon down to Sir John Herschel, have said the same thing;—hitherto, alas, in vain! See Herschel’sLetter to Dr. Pye Smith. Mill’sDissert.i. 435-461. Renan,Hist. Rel.xxvii. Charma, p. 248.
[43]Dr. Whewell,Hist. of Ind. Science, iii. 504. A host of eminent authorities, from Bacon down to Sir John Herschel, have said the same thing;—hitherto, alas, in vain! See Herschel’sLetter to Dr. Pye Smith. Mill’sDissert.i. 435-461. Renan,Hist. Rel.xxvii. Charma, p. 248.
[44]St. Gregory of Nyssa has expressed himself on this subject with startling freedom of thought. He alludes with ironic pity to those who speak of the Deity as the fabricator of Adam’s language, an opinion which he expressly calls a sottish and ridiculous vanity, quite worthy of the extravagant presumption of the Jews. And on the subject of Babel, he says, “The confusion of tongues must be necessarily attributed to the will of God according to the theologic point of view, but according to the truth of history it is the work of man.”—Contra Eunomium, Or.xii. p. 782. Nodier, p. 56. St. Augustin distinctly implies the same thing.—De Ord.ii. 12.
[44]St. Gregory of Nyssa has expressed himself on this subject with startling freedom of thought. He alludes with ironic pity to those who speak of the Deity as the fabricator of Adam’s language, an opinion which he expressly calls a sottish and ridiculous vanity, quite worthy of the extravagant presumption of the Jews. And on the subject of Babel, he says, “The confusion of tongues must be necessarily attributed to the will of God according to the theologic point of view, but according to the truth of history it is the work of man.”—Contra Eunomium, Or.xii. p. 782. Nodier, p. 56. St. Augustin distinctly implies the same thing.—De Ord.ii. 12.
[45]Since writing the above, I have met with another Biblical argument in favour of the Revelation of Language, drawn from Gen. i. 5.καὶ τὸ μὲν φῶς ἐκάλεσεν ὀ Θεὸς ἡμέραν, τὸ δὲ σκότος νύκτα· ἐπεί τοι γε ἄνθρωπος οὐκ ἂν ᾔδει καλεῖν τὸ φῶς ἡμέραν ἢ τὸ σκότος νύκτα. ἀλλ’ οὐδὲ μὲν τὰ λοιπὰ, εἰ μὴ τὴν ὀνομασίαν εἰλήφει ἀπὸ τοῦ ποιήσαντος ἀυτὰ Θεοῦ.—Theophil.ad Autolyc.ii. 18. ed. Wolf. p. 140. I present this argument without reply to any one who is convinced by it.
[45]Since writing the above, I have met with another Biblical argument in favour of the Revelation of Language, drawn from Gen. i. 5.καὶ τὸ μὲν φῶς ἐκάλεσεν ὀ Θεὸς ἡμέραν, τὸ δὲ σκότος νύκτα· ἐπεί τοι γε ἄνθρωπος οὐκ ἂν ᾔδει καλεῖν τὸ φῶς ἡμέραν ἢ τὸ σκότος νύκτα. ἀλλ’ οὐδὲ μὲν τὰ λοιπὰ, εἰ μὴ τὴν ὀνομασίαν εἰλήφει ἀπὸ τοῦ ποιήσαντος ἀυτὰ Θεοῦ.—Theophil.ad Autolyc.ii. 18. ed. Wolf. p. 140. I present this argument without reply to any one who is convinced by it.
[46]Stewart,Phil. of the Mind, iii. 1.
[46]Stewart,Phil. of the Mind, iii. 1.
[47]“This method of referring words immediately to God as their framer, is a short cut to escape inquiry and explanation. It saves the philosopher much trouble, but leaves mankind in great ignorance, and leads to great error.Non dignus vindice nodus.God having furnished man with senses, and with organs of articulation, as he has also with water, lime, and sand, it should seem no more necessary to form the words for man, than to temper the mortar.”—Divers. of Purley, Pt. i. ch. 2.
[47]“This method of referring words immediately to God as their framer, is a short cut to escape inquiry and explanation. It saves the philosopher much trouble, but leaves mankind in great ignorance, and leads to great error.Non dignus vindice nodus.God having furnished man with senses, and with organs of articulation, as he has also with water, lime, and sand, it should seem no more necessary to form the words for man, than to temper the mortar.”—Divers. of Purley, Pt. i. ch. 2.
[48]Gen. ii. 19, 20.
[48]Gen. ii. 19, 20.
[49]e.g. There is no hint ofgrammar, the very blood of language. “Une Langue n’est pas une seule collection des mots.”—Cousin,Cours de 1829, iii. 212.
[49]e.g. There is no hint ofgrammar, the very blood of language. “Une Langue n’est pas une seule collection des mots.”—Cousin,Cours de 1829, iii. 212.
[50]Renan, p. 85. See an eloquent passage of Schlegel’s to the same effect, quoted in Wiseman’sLect.i. 108. Pythagoras probably had some vague sentiment of the kind when he said that “the name-giver” was both the most ancient and the most rational of men. The Egyptians worshipped Theuth as the Regulator of Language; and the Chinese referred its origin to their great mysterious King Fohi. See Cic.Tusc. Disp.i. 28. Lersch,die Sprachphilos. der Alten. Bonn, 1838, i. 23-29.
[50]Renan, p. 85. See an eloquent passage of Schlegel’s to the same effect, quoted in Wiseman’sLect.i. 108. Pythagoras probably had some vague sentiment of the kind when he said that “the name-giver” was both the most ancient and the most rational of men. The Egyptians worshipped Theuth as the Regulator of Language; and the Chinese referred its origin to their great mysterious King Fohi. See Cic.Tusc. Disp.i. 28. Lersch,die Sprachphilos. der Alten. Bonn, 1838, i. 23-29.
[51]Bunsen, i. 49.
[51]Bunsen, i. 49.
[52]The fact that man is a social animal (ζῶον πολιτικὸν) which has been so strangely urged by the advocates of a revealed language, from Lactantius down to M. de Bonald and the Abbé Combalot, in no way militates against this conclusion.
[52]The fact that man is a social animal (ζῶον πολιτικὸν) which has been so strangely urged by the advocates of a revealed language, from Lactantius down to M. de Bonald and the Abbé Combalot, in no way militates against this conclusion.
[53]Heyse,System der Sprachwissenschaft, § 50.
[53]Heyse,System der Sprachwissenschaft, § 50.
[54]Schlegel.
[54]Schlegel.
[55]Wil. von Humboldt.
[55]Wil. von Humboldt.
[56]Grimm.
[56]Grimm.
[57]Renan.
[57]Renan.
[58]The Revelation of Language is supported in a book by J. S. Süssmilch, Berlin, 1766. An excellent review of the main opinions is given by R. W. Zobel,Gedanken über die verschiedenenMeinungen der Gelehrnten von Ursprunge der Sprachen. Magdeb. 1733.
[58]The Revelation of Language is supported in a book by J. S. Süssmilch, Berlin, 1766. An excellent review of the main opinions is given by R. W. Zobel,Gedanken über die verschiedenenMeinungen der Gelehrnten von Ursprunge der Sprachen. Magdeb. 1733.
[59]See Franck’sDictionnaire des Sciences Philosophiques, Art.Signes. I must here again caution the reader that the view here supported isnotthe conventional theory of language condemned in the last chapter, although it might easily become so in the hands of a person inclined to look at the physiological rather than the psychological aspects of the question.
[59]See Franck’sDictionnaire des Sciences Philosophiques, Art.Signes. I must here again caution the reader that the view here supported isnotthe conventional theory of language condemned in the last chapter, although it might easily become so in the hands of a person inclined to look at the physiological rather than the psychological aspects of the question.
[60]This is an expression of F. Schlegel’s (Philos. Vorlesungen, p. 78-80). Renan also quotes the authority of Humboldt and Goethe.
[60]This is an expression of F. Schlegel’s (Philos. Vorlesungen, p. 78-80). Renan also quotes the authority of Humboldt and Goethe.
[61]“Seht, es ist schwer zu denken auf welche Art man denkt.... Ich denke, und mit dem Zeuge, womit ich denke, soll ich denken wie dieses Zeug beschaffen sei,” &c.—Tieck,Blaubart, act. ii. sc. 1.
[61]“Seht, es ist schwer zu denken auf welche Art man denkt.... Ich denke, und mit dem Zeuge, womit ich denke, soll ich denken wie dieses Zeug beschaffen sei,” &c.—Tieck,Blaubart, act. ii. sc. 1.
[62]We are, for instance, obliged entirely to pass over the question as to the Primum Cognitum, on which see Sir W. Hamilton’sLectures, ii. 319-331.
[62]We are, for instance, obliged entirely to pass over the question as to the Primum Cognitum, on which see Sir W. Hamilton’sLectures, ii. 319-331.
[63]“One might be tempted to call Language a kind of Picture of the Universe, where the words are as the figures and images of all particulars.”—Harris’sHermes, p. 330. This is something like Plato’s curious notion that words are aμίμησιςof external things.—Heyse,System, s. 24.ἐοικέναι γὰρ τὰ ὀνόματα ... εἰκόσι τῶν ὁρατῶν.—Heraclitus,ap. Ammonium ad Arist. de Interp.p. 24. Democritus called themἀγάλματα φωνήεντα.
[63]“One might be tempted to call Language a kind of Picture of the Universe, where the words are as the figures and images of all particulars.”—Harris’sHermes, p. 330. This is something like Plato’s curious notion that words are aμίμησιςof external things.—Heyse,System, s. 24.ἐοικέναι γὰρ τὰ ὀνόματα ... εἰκόσι τῶν ὁρατῶν.—Heraclitus,ap. Ammonium ad Arist. de Interp.p. 24. Democritus called themἀγάλματα φωνήεντα.
[64]Garnett’sEssays, p. 281-341.
[64]Garnett’sEssays, p. 281-341.
[65]Quoted by Mr. Garnett, p. 283.
[65]Quoted by Mr. Garnett, p. 283.
[66]Grimm, 29-31. Compare Heyse,System, s. 28. “Nur was gedacht ist, kann gesprochen werden; und das klar gedachte ist nothwendig auch ansprechbar.” What St. Paul saw in his rapture was only unutterable because it recalled no human analogon. (2 Cor. xii. 4.)
[66]Grimm, 29-31. Compare Heyse,System, s. 28. “Nur was gedacht ist, kann gesprochen werden; und das klar gedachte ist nothwendig auch ansprechbar.” What St. Paul saw in his rapture was only unutterable because it recalled no human analogon. (2 Cor. xii. 4.)
[67]Manudscha, Goth. Manniska, Germ. Mensch; from the root man, “to think.” Compareφράζειν, “to speak,” andφράζεσθαι, “to think.”—Heyse, s. 40. Turner ad Herod, ii. 7.
[67]Manudscha, Goth. Manniska, Germ. Mensch; from the root man, “to think.” Compareφράζειν, “to speak,” andφράζεσθαι, “to think.”—Heyse, s. 40. Turner ad Herod, ii. 7.
[68]“Speech,” says Humboldt, “is the necessary condition of the thought of the individual.” The statement should at least be qualified by the word “now.” For some allusions to this interesting discussion, see Archbishop Whately’sLogic, ch. ii. M. de Bonaldassumedthe reverse: “L’homme pense sa paroleavantde parler sa pensée.” See, too, Mill’sLogic, ii. 201. Charma, p. 134. Of course the short-hand of human intelligence is too infinitely rapid and abbreviated for us to be always able to read it off with facility; or, as Mr. Tennyson expresses it,“Thought leapt out to wed with thought,Ere thought could wed itself to speech;”but we are inclined to believe that withoutsomesigns (not necessarily words—see Charma,Essai sur le Langage, p. 50) thought could not exist. When we cannot express what we mean, the reason probably is that we have noclearmeaning. “Die Sprache ist nichts anderes als der in die Erscheinung tretende Gedanke, und beide sind innerlichnur eins und das selbe.”—Becker,Organism. der Sprache, p. 2. “Sans signes nous ne penserions presque pas.”—Destutt de Tracy,Idéologie, pt. xvii. Plotinus distinctly asserts the contrary.Τὸ δὴ λογιζόμενον τῆς ψυχῆς οὐδένος πρὸς τὸ λογίζεσθαι δεόμενον σωματικοῦ ὀργάνου.—Ennead, v. 1, ch. 10.
[68]“Speech,” says Humboldt, “is the necessary condition of the thought of the individual.” The statement should at least be qualified by the word “now.” For some allusions to this interesting discussion, see Archbishop Whately’sLogic, ch. ii. M. de Bonaldassumedthe reverse: “L’homme pense sa paroleavantde parler sa pensée.” See, too, Mill’sLogic, ii. 201. Charma, p. 134. Of course the short-hand of human intelligence is too infinitely rapid and abbreviated for us to be always able to read it off with facility; or, as Mr. Tennyson expresses it,
“Thought leapt out to wed with thought,Ere thought could wed itself to speech;”
“Thought leapt out to wed with thought,Ere thought could wed itself to speech;”
“Thought leapt out to wed with thought,
Ere thought could wed itself to speech;”
but we are inclined to believe that withoutsomesigns (not necessarily words—see Charma,Essai sur le Langage, p. 50) thought could not exist. When we cannot express what we mean, the reason probably is that we have noclearmeaning. “Die Sprache ist nichts anderes als der in die Erscheinung tretende Gedanke, und beide sind innerlichnur eins und das selbe.”—Becker,Organism. der Sprache, p. 2. “Sans signes nous ne penserions presque pas.”—Destutt de Tracy,Idéologie, pt. xvii. Plotinus distinctly asserts the contrary.Τὸ δὴ λογιζόμενον τῆς ψυχῆς οὐδένος πρὸς τὸ λογίζεσθαι δεόμενον σωματικοῦ ὀργάνου.—Ennead, v. 1, ch. 10.
[69]In Memoriam.
[69]In Memoriam.
[70]See Harper,on the Force of the Greek Tenses.
[70]See Harper,on the Force of the Greek Tenses.
[71]Der Ursprung der Sprache.Berlin, 1851. We closely follow M. Renan’s exposition as given in his preface, pp. 31, sq. Heyse sums it up in one sentence, “Man kann mithin in dem Worte ein dreifaches Moment unterscheiden: 1. die Lautform; 2. das dadurch bezeichnete in Sprachbewusstsein liegende Merkmal der Vorstellung; 3. den reinen Begriff, welchen der denkende Geist in seiner Erhebung über die Individuelle Vorstellungsweise bildet, und als dessen Zeichen ihm gleichfalls das Wort dienen muss.”—Heyse,System, s. 160.
[71]Der Ursprung der Sprache.Berlin, 1851. We closely follow M. Renan’s exposition as given in his preface, pp. 31, sq. Heyse sums it up in one sentence, “Man kann mithin in dem Worte ein dreifaches Moment unterscheiden: 1. die Lautform; 2. das dadurch bezeichnete in Sprachbewusstsein liegende Merkmal der Vorstellung; 3. den reinen Begriff, welchen der denkende Geist in seiner Erhebung über die Individuelle Vorstellungsweise bildet, und als dessen Zeichen ihm gleichfalls das Wort dienen muss.”—Heyse,System, s. 160.
[72]Garnier,Traité des facultés de l’Ame. Renan, p. 90.
[72]Garnier,Traité des facultés de l’Ame. Renan, p. 90.
[73]Motus animi.In the origin of language, the spontaneous awakening of a sense of thepossibilityof expressing thought by speech, was in point of fact simultaneous with the production of an objective Language as the material in which the awakened intelligence could find expression. Heyse, s. 47.
[73]Motus animi.In the origin of language, the spontaneous awakening of a sense of thepossibilityof expressing thought by speech, was in point of fact simultaneous with the production of an objective Language as the material in which the awakened intelligence could find expression. Heyse, s. 47.
[74]Seeante.
[74]Seeante.
[75]On this law of association, see Sir W. Hamilton’sLectures, i. 366.
[75]On this law of association, see Sir W. Hamilton’sLectures, i. 366.
[76]Exclamations, natural interjections would probably be the first to acquire significance.
[76]Exclamations, natural interjections would probably be the first to acquire significance.
[77]In some savage languages abstraction is at the lowest ebb. Thus, in Iroquois, there is no word for “good” in the abstract, but only words for “a good man,” &c.; and in Mohican there is no verb for “I love,” independent of the forms which involve the object of the affection, as “I love him,” “I love you.”—Adelung’sMithrid.iii. b. p. 397. So again the Chinese in many cases cannot express the simple conception without a periphrasis, and have words for “elder brother” and “younger brother,” but not for “brother.”—Humboldt.
[77]In some savage languages abstraction is at the lowest ebb. Thus, in Iroquois, there is no word for “good” in the abstract, but only words for “a good man,” &c.; and in Mohican there is no verb for “I love,” independent of the forms which involve the object of the affection, as “I love him,” “I love you.”—Adelung’sMithrid.iii. b. p. 397. So again the Chinese in many cases cannot express the simple conception without a periphrasis, and have words for “elder brother” and “younger brother,” but not for “brother.”—Humboldt.
[78]See Gesenius,Lehrgebäude, p. 479. Ewald’sHebrew Grammar, § 201. “The Mandschou is most like the Semitic here; in it the origin is still plainer, sinceamameans father,ememother, according to the uniform distinction ofaas the stronger, andeas the weaker vowel.”—Renan,Hist. des Langues Sémitiques, p. 452. Rawlinson’sHerodotus, i. 481.
[78]See Gesenius,Lehrgebäude, p. 479. Ewald’sHebrew Grammar, § 201. “The Mandschou is most like the Semitic here; in it the origin is still plainer, sinceamameans father,ememother, according to the uniform distinction ofaas the stronger, andeas the weaker vowel.”—Renan,Hist. des Langues Sémitiques, p. 452. Rawlinson’sHerodotus, i. 481.
[79]Similarly it has been observed by M. Nodier that the most ancient names of God are composed only of the softest and simplest vowels (Notions, p. 15). This reminds us of the famous oracle,φράζεο τὸν πάντων ὕπατον θεὸν ἔμμεν’ Ιάω.
[79]Similarly it has been observed by M. Nodier that the most ancient names of God are composed only of the softest and simplest vowels (Notions, p. 15). This reminds us of the famous oracle,φράζεο τὸν πάντων ὕπατον θεὸν ἔμμεν’ Ιάω.
[80]Über den Ursprung, &c., p. 35.
[80]Über den Ursprung, &c., p. 35.
[81]It is strange that the French language should not have adopted the same course as the English, in discarding this useless rag of antiquity. The influences which led to the decision of genders in any particular case were purely fanciful.
[81]It is strange that the French language should not have adopted the same course as the English, in discarding this useless rag of antiquity. The influences which led to the decision of genders in any particular case were purely fanciful.
[82]Renan, p. 28.
[82]Renan, p. 28.
[83]Rousseau,Essai sur l’Origine des Langues.
[83]Rousseau,Essai sur l’Origine des Langues.
[84]Notions, p. 24 sqq. The remarks on the labials are too amusing to be omitted. “Le bambin, le poupon, le marmot a trouvé les trois labiales; il bée, il baye, il balbutie, il bégaye, il babille, il blatère, il bêle, il bavarde, il braille, il boude, il bouque, il bougonne sur une babiole, sur une bagatelle, sur une billevesée, sur une bêtise, sur un bébé, sur un bonbon, sur un bobo, sur le bilboquet pendu à l’étalage du bimbelotier. Il nomme sa mère et son père avec des mimologismes caressants, et quoiqu’il n’ait encore découvert que la simple touche des lèvres, l’âme se meut déjà dans les mots qu’il module au hasard. Ce Cadmus au maillot vient d’entrevoir un mystère aussi grand à lui seul que tout le reste de la création. Il parle sa pensée.” Want of space alone compels us to refrain from transcribing the remarks on the progress of infants and of society to the dentals. We must say, however, that such speculations must be very sparingly indulged by sober philologists. Many of them, at first sight plausible, were refuted by Plato long ago in theCratylus, and they lead to a grammatical mysticism which has been well exposed by M. Charma,Essai, p. 213.
[84]Notions, p. 24 sqq. The remarks on the labials are too amusing to be omitted. “Le bambin, le poupon, le marmot a trouvé les trois labiales; il bée, il baye, il balbutie, il bégaye, il babille, il blatère, il bêle, il bavarde, il braille, il boude, il bouque, il bougonne sur une babiole, sur une bagatelle, sur une billevesée, sur une bêtise, sur un bébé, sur un bonbon, sur un bobo, sur le bilboquet pendu à l’étalage du bimbelotier. Il nomme sa mère et son père avec des mimologismes caressants, et quoiqu’il n’ait encore découvert que la simple touche des lèvres, l’âme se meut déjà dans les mots qu’il module au hasard. Ce Cadmus au maillot vient d’entrevoir un mystère aussi grand à lui seul que tout le reste de la création. Il parle sa pensée.” Want of space alone compels us to refrain from transcribing the remarks on the progress of infants and of society to the dentals. We must say, however, that such speculations must be very sparingly indulged by sober philologists. Many of them, at first sight plausible, were refuted by Plato long ago in theCratylus, and they lead to a grammatical mysticism which has been well exposed by M. Charma,Essai, p. 213.
[85]By roots we do not mean words used in the primitive language, but rather “skeletons of articulate sound.” “They are merely the fictions of grammarians to indicate thecoreof a group of related words.”—Hensleigh Wedgwood’sEtymolog. Dict.p. iii. For some remarks on the nature of roots, see Donaldson’sNew Cratyl.bk. iii. ch. 1. Ewald’sHebrew Gram.§ 202. This naked kernel of a family of words is often best found in theyoungestdialects, e.g.kind(child) fromγίγνομαι, genitum, &c. Grimm,Deutsche Gramm.ii. 5. 3. Bopp.Vgl. Gramm.s. 131.
[85]By roots we do not mean words used in the primitive language, but rather “skeletons of articulate sound.” “They are merely the fictions of grammarians to indicate thecoreof a group of related words.”—Hensleigh Wedgwood’sEtymolog. Dict.p. iii. For some remarks on the nature of roots, see Donaldson’sNew Cratyl.bk. iii. ch. 1. Ewald’sHebrew Gram.§ 202. This naked kernel of a family of words is often best found in theyoungestdialects, e.g.kind(child) fromγίγνομαι, genitum, &c. Grimm,Deutsche Gramm.ii. 5. 3. Bopp.Vgl. Gramm.s. 131.
[86]One or two philosophers (e.g. Kircher, Becher, Dalgarno, Bp. Wilkins, Descartes, Leibnitz) have amused themselves with the invention of languages quite arbitrary, in which every word was to be accurately determined; but no artificial language actually used has ever thus arisen. The Germanrothwelsch, the Italiangergo, the Frenchnarquois, the English “thieves’ language,” thelingua francawhich serves for commercial purposes on the shores of the Mediterranean, the strange jargon spoken by the Chinese and English at Hong Kong, &c., have all arisen froma corruption of existing languagesby metaphors, new words, new meanings, derivation, composition, &c. See Leibnitz,Nouv. Essai sur l’Entendement Humain, iii.I.2.
[86]One or two philosophers (e.g. Kircher, Becher, Dalgarno, Bp. Wilkins, Descartes, Leibnitz) have amused themselves with the invention of languages quite arbitrary, in which every word was to be accurately determined; but no artificial language actually used has ever thus arisen. The Germanrothwelsch, the Italiangergo, the Frenchnarquois, the English “thieves’ language,” thelingua francawhich serves for commercial purposes on the shores of the Mediterranean, the strange jargon spoken by the Chinese and English at Hong Kong, &c., have all arisen froma corruption of existing languagesby metaphors, new words, new meanings, derivation, composition, &c. See Leibnitz,Nouv. Essai sur l’Entendement Humain, iii.I.2.
[87]Mr. Garnett,Essays, p. 105. Latham,Lect. on Language.
[87]Mr. Garnett,Essays, p. 105. Latham,Lect. on Language.
[88]What, for instance, is the origin of the initialσin such words asσμικρὸς, σφάλλω, or of the initial vowels inὄνομα, ὀδοὺς, ἀμέλγω, &c.?—Garnett, p. 107.
[88]What, for instance, is the origin of the initialσin such words asσμικρὸς, σφάλλω, or of the initial vowels inὄνομα, ὀδοὺς, ἀμέλγω, &c.?—Garnett, p. 107.
[89]When a boy answers a lady in the words “Yes, ’m,” he is not aware that his “’m” is a fragment of the five syllables mea domina (madonna, madame, madam, ma’am, ’m.) “Letters, like soldiers, being veryapt to desert anddrop off in a long march.”—Divers. of Purley, pt. i. ch. vi. “Les noms des saints et les noms des baptêmes les plus communs en sont un exemple.”—De Brosses.
[89]When a boy answers a lady in the words “Yes, ’m,” he is not aware that his “’m” is a fragment of the five syllables mea domina (madonna, madame, madam, ma’am, ’m.) “Letters, like soldiers, being veryapt to desert anddrop off in a long march.”—Divers. of Purley, pt. i. ch. vi. “Les noms des saints et les noms des baptêmes les plus communs en sont un exemple.”—De Brosses.
[90]SeePhilological Transactions, v. 133 sq.
[90]SeePhilological Transactions, v. 133 sq.
[91]Phil. Trans.v. 133 sq. “The facility with which unusual or difficult words are corrupted is being at this moment strikingly illustrated in the numerous Spanish words introduced into our language through the American conquests in Mexico;cañon, estancia, stampedo, &c., are already altered in form.”—R.G.
[91]Phil. Trans.v. 133 sq. “The facility with which unusual or difficult words are corrupted is being at this moment strikingly illustrated in the numerous Spanish words introduced into our language through the American conquests in Mexico;cañon, estancia, stampedo, &c., are already altered in form.”—R.G.