* * * * *
_Language._
The hypothesis I have met with, I think in Parsons’s Remains of Japhet,
that the confusion of languages at Babel was a visitation on the family
of Ham only, which spread itself over Africa, is certainly supported
(considering the radical affinities which have been traced between the
Arabic the Russ and the Greek, the Persian and the German, the Qquichua,
or language of the Incas, and the Sanscrit, and many others[111]) by the
variety of languages in Africa which cannot be assimilated in the least
degree to each other, and which would, I think, resist the laborious
ingenuity of the philologist.
I have heard about half a dozen words in the Fantee, which might be said
to be not unlike the same nouns in the Welsh language; and this is the
only affinity which has been imagined. Two words only in the Accra
language have struck me as assimilating to those of any other, the
conjunction “_kay_” (_and_), which with a broader sound would answer the
corresponding Greek conjunction και; and _fai_ (_to do_,) pronounced as
the perfect participle of the same verb in French, and which is spelled
_fai_ in the old songs of Richard the first, and the troubadour Faydit.
The Fantee word _umpa_ (_true, indeed_,) may be imagined to resemble the
Greek εμπας, which has the same meaning; but it is a solitary instance.
From Apollonia or Amănăheä to the Volta, about 300 miles, six languages
are spoken: the Amanaheä, Ahanta, Fantee, Affoottoo, Accra, and the
Adampë. The numerals of which will appear, collaterally with others
hitherto unknown, at the end of this chapter.
The Ashantee, in comparison with the Fantee, Warsaw, &c. &c. from its
refinement of idiom, oratory being so much more cultivated, may be
considered as the Attic amongst the dialects of the Greek, but it owes
its superior euphony, striking to any ear, to the characteristics of the
Ionic, an abundance of vowel sounds, and a rejection of aspirates:
_Fantee._ _Ashantee._
Key Sāfie Saphwooa.
Lock Karradacoo Karradoo.
Night Adayfwa Adagio.
Day Aweeabil Aweeabillee.
Gun Etoorh Oteuh.
Vocabularies of these languages would not be interesting to the public,
especially as no affinity can be traced; and I know not how to acquit
myself of every thing like indifference to the curiosity at home,
(without the dulness of the subject proving more irksome than a
disappointment,) unless I endeavour to give an idea of the philosophy of
the languages,[112] and submit their progress, collaterally with that of
the arts and manners. The genius of the Accra language differing the
most essentially from that of the Ashantee or Fantee, examples from both
will be instanced for illustration. I have principally consulted two
gentlemen, natives of the country, but educated in Europe: the one
resident between forty and fifty years; the other, who has a respectable
knowledge of the grammar of the English and French languages, returned
from England about ten years back, and both are as fluent as the Negroes
in the Fantee and Accra, the latter being their vernacular tongue.
Impressed with the ingenious hypothesis of the learned author of the
Diversions of Purley, my first care has been to investigate the
particles of the Fantee and Accra, considering the languages of
uncivilised people, to be least advanced or removed from the primeval
simplicity, to which Mr. Horne Tooke’s system refers. I found, however,
both the Accra and Fantee languages more complete than I expected in
conjunctions, and seldom using verbs instead of them, which I presumed
they might do. Yet I have no doubt, their half dozen of conjunctions, if
examined etymologically by a person thoroughly conversant in the
languages, might be traced, and shewn to be the contracted imperatives
of the most recurrent verbs, as Mr. Tooke has proved those of our own
language to be. Neither the Accra or Fantee have conjunctions answering
to each of ours; the distinction between many is neither comprehensible
or necessary to them. I will submit their conjunctions, with those
investigated in the first volume of the Diversions of Purley.
_Fantee._ _Accra._
Onee and Kay
{ if
Sey { Kedgee
{ unless
{ still
Emphee { Shee
{ but
{ because Nooyĕwon
Interah {
{ since Nunnë
{ notwithstanding
Namoo { Nemoolay
{ though
{ otherwise
Anna { Noollay
{ or
There are no adverbs in either language. There are but two in our own
which may not be expressed by a verb or an adnoun, _still_ and _since_;
and these they express by the conjunctions _but_ and _because_. “I
intreated, but (still) he would not,” “because (since) it is so,” as the
Latins frequently used prepositions for the Greek adverbs. Indeed
_since_ is expressible by a verb, being derived according to Mr. Tooke
from the Saxon _sithan_, seeing that. They express the adverb _much_ by
the adjective _many_; _ago_ by a verb, “_it passes_ ten years;” _almost_
by the verb _it wants_, “_it wants_ to rain;” and _when_ by a noun,
“_the time_ I was there,” coincident with Jones’s derivation of
ὁτε.[113] _Nooyĕwon_, (_because_) in Accra, is literally, “_for the sake
of_.” _Intērah_, the corresponding word in Fantee, “on the head of,”
(_tirree_ is head) thus, they would say, “I do this on your head,” or
because you told me. Lest, which is considered by Mr. Horne Tooke to be
the past participle of the Saxon verb leyan, to dismiss, is not to be
found either in the Accra or Fantee: in the former they would say,
“_Menkaw hauh ebbēbărădi_,” “do not go there, you fall down;” and in the
latter, “_Kaiheah djai nee oheäbwayshee_,” “do not go there, and (or
for) you fall down.” The use of the noun for the adverb is frequent in
Demosthenes, (“εϛι δικαιος εχειν,” “he justly deserves”) and can only be
accounted for in a prose writer, who does not need poetical licenses, as
an archaism, disused generally, through invention or refinement. The
term adverb is not a just indication of the origin of that part of
speech, for, although they are derived from verbs as well as nouns, yet,
in our own language, as well as in the Greek, following Mr. Horne Tooke,
the greater number are derived from nouns: and those (of which there are
some in the Greek) which may be indifferently derived from a noun, or a
verb, may be referred to the former; because, many of the adnouns from
which adverbs are derived in the Greek, have been pointed out as
disused; and therefore the verbs from which adverbs are exclusively
derived, are likely to be derived themselves from obsolete adnouns,
which cannot be recalled; for it has been philosophically advanced, that
originally there could have been but one sort of words, that is, nouns,
or the names of the objects of our sensations and ideas.[114]
I consider the absence of adverbs, participles, and prepositions,
certainly the least indispensible parts of speech, and favouring
copiousness rather than energy, to be a proof of the almost genuine, or
primeval simplicity of the Accra and Fantee languages, which have not
advanced or altered, even in the small degree of their arts or manners;
for these have only been ameliorated by commercial intercourse with
strangers, who not understanding their language could not have suggested
improvements, and from whose languages, they being equally
unintelligible, amendments could not have been copied. We find
Portuguese nouns, and nouns only, adopted in the Fantee; and that, of
necessity, as Saxon nouns were adopted in the Welsh or Celtic, because
they had no words to designate novelties they had never before seen or
heard of; and, therefore, they called them as those did who introduced
them. These primitive languages being, nevertheless, thoroughly adequate
to oratory as well as the commoner purposes of speech, is a strong proof
that language was revealed, as Johnson, Blair, Warburton, and others
have maintained, and that it was not the fruit of human invention or
industry, as Lucretius, Horace, and most of the antients imagined.
Neither the Accra or Fantee distinguish genders, the name of the person,
or the context, is the only explication; they have not even a third
person feminine, but one pronoun serves for _he, she, it_.
The Accra has a definite and indefinite article, but both are affixed to
the noun, as “_minna nooleh_,” I saw the man; “_minna nookoo_,” I saw a
man. The indefinite article “_koo_” is the contraction of numeral one,
“_ekoo_,” so that I saw a man, is literally “I saw man one.” _An_ is
simply another form of the numeral one, still used in North Britain
under the form ane; and in the French, the numeral and the article
corresponding to one, are the same. The Fantee, like the Greek, has no
indefinite article, or according to Mr. Harris’s expression, on which
Mr. Horne Tooke is so pleasant, “supplies it by a negation of the
definite,” which is “_noo_,” affixed, as “_mehoon nimpanoo_,” I saw the
man.[115]
In the Accra, the plural is formed by inflection, epenthesis, paragoge,
and apocope: these changes are almost peculiar in every noun; the more
frequent inflections are, ai, ay, and ee.
_Singular._ _Plural._
A woman yeo yeay.
A box adikka adikkai.
A stone teh tai.
Ground shepong shepongee.
A hyæna krang krangee.
A father tchay tchaymë.
A liar amallalo amallaloi.
A gun toon tween.
A vessel lelen ledgenë.
A man noon nhal.
A house tchoon tchuë.
In the Fantee the plural number is distinguished by the prefix _en_,
though generally, if they can, (in a glance whilst speaking) discover
the number of objects, they use a numeral with the noun singular; or, if
they cannot be so precise in the instant, they substitute _many_ to mark
an indefinite number. The Chinese also, are said to drop their plural
adjunct “_min_,” when there is another word of plurality attached to the
noun.
Neither language has prepositions, and of course peraphrasis is
generally resorted to: conjunctions are sometimes substituted, as _and_
for _with_; occasionally verbs, as “the King _to give_ his captain,” for
_to his captain_; and, sometimes, they are presumed from the tone or the
context. Mr. Horne Tooke, who values prepositions very much, has traced
all but five, of our own language, to nouns and verbs; and of these
five, three have since been traced to nouns and a numeral; so that _out_
and _off_, only, are unaccounted for. Jones, in his Greek Grammar,
writes, “the roots of prepositions are nouns and verbs,” and,
accordingly, he derives απο from the Hebrew, _ab_, a stem, περι from the
Arabic _pera_, eminence, υπερ from the Hebrew _aber_, sky, or the
Persian _ober_, a cloud: the inseparable prepositions had been traced to
nouns and verbs long before.
Degrees of comparison are not expressed by adjectives or adverbs, in
either language: but, for he is richer than he, the Accras would say,
“_eh phay leh ne_;” the Fantees, “_aw tchen adee_,” he _passes him_ (in)
things: neither language has an adjective answering to rich or wealthy,
but “_ne_,” and “_adee_,” in both, correspond exactly in meaning and use
with the _res_ of the Latins: the superlative would be expressed by “_he
passes all_.” The antient idiom of comparison, antecedent to the general
use of inflections or adverbs, was probably similar, judging from the
following, and many other sentences in the Greek, “Παῥ ἑαυτὸν μηδένα
ἐπιτὴδειον ἡγεῖτο, he thought no body fitter than himself;” “πλείονος
δοξης παρὰ Μωσῆν ἠξίωται, Heb. xiii. he was counted of more glory, or
more glorious than Moses.” Here παρα, so frequently expressing
comparison, being derived from the verb περαω, _to pass_, is identical
with the Accra and Fantee expression.
I observed before that the Accra and Fantee have no adjective answering
to rich, they are also deficient in many others, which they supply by a
second substantive in the same manner. This idiom is found in the Greek,
“Το σωμα της ταπεινωσεως ἠμων, our humiliated body, the body of our
humiliation; Αιρεσεις απωλειας. destructive heresies, &c. &c.” and it
is said to be both a Hebrew and Celtic idiom; primeval languages, and
the latter, I presume, as rude as those we are investigating.
In the Accra, the personal pronouns are
I me
thou boh
he, she, it lheh
we whah
you nnheay
they amăy
_Me_ is generally reduplicate before verbs, as “_me me yay_” I eat.
_Boh_ before verbs generally suffers aphæresis as “_oh yay_,” thou
eatest, but sometimes not, as “_boh fai_,” thou doest: this is also the
case with _lheh_ as “_heh yay, lheh fai_.” _Me_ is added, as _met_ in
Latin, to make these pronouns compound. In Fantee the personal pronouns
are
I me
thou awaw
he, she, it narra
we yarra
you awoo
they warra;
the latter is used as a possessive pronoun also; _woodde_ is affixed to
make them compound; they are irregularly contracted before verbs.
Considering these barbarous languages of primitive simplicity, and
recollecting the original and philosophical deduction of pronouns from
verbs, by the Greek professor of Glasgow, as εγω or εγων (which is the
more ancient) from λεγων, ipse from επω, I particularly enquired for
verbs resembling their pronouns; but, after a long and diligent
recollection, neither of my authorities could furnish me with any to the
point. It is curious to observe, that the _me_ represents the pronoun I,
in both these rude languages,[116] as it does, though not in the
nominative case, in most other primitive languages, and in the modern
ones derived from them: it would seem to be the natural and involuntary
expression for that pronoun.
There is only an active voice in the Accra or Fantee; the passive is
expressed by a circumlocution, as he loves, or they love me, for I am
loved, &c.[117] It appears erroneous to consider the infinitive mood as
the root of the verb, when it has a separable or distinguishing
termination, and _mong_ is as distinctly the verbalizing adjunct in the
Accra language, as _ere_ or _are_ in the Latin, ειν in Greek, or an in
the Anglo-Saxon. If we consider the imperative as the divested
fundamental form of the verb, it is still difficult in these languages
to get at the root, for the use of the infinitive for the imperative,
occasional in the Greek, is, in the Accra, so general, that for some
time I thought it unexceptionable, and that it had not the two moods.
The Accra has the neuter verb _to be_ in the present, perfect, and
future tenses, but in the perfect, it is irregular.
I am I have been I shall be
meyeh metay mahyeh
The Fantee only has it in the present, “_oh yea_, he is.” It is
remarkable that even the linguists of our forts, who speak English
fluently, never understand or use our neuter verb _to be_, but
substitute _live_ for it, and that, whether they speak of animate or
inanimate things; a servant would say, “your keys live in your pocket.”
The imperative mood has a present tense complete in each language.
They express the potential mood by adding auxiliary verbs, such as our
can, may, &c., have been shewn to be derived from.
The termination of the infinitive in the Accra is generally _mong_,
which is rejected in conjugating. In the Fantee it is not distinguished
from the first person present, or root. The use of the infinitive mood,
even in Accra, is very circumscribed, for it is not found even in the
most natural case when two verbs come together, as I want to eat, for
which they say, “_metōn meyay_,” I want I eat. The infinitive is
generally used for the imperative in the Accra, but, otherwise, it only
occurs in an idiom almost peculiar to that language, for instance, for
are you walking now, they say,
“_Neo_mong oh _neo_ neh,”
“To walk are you walking now.”
For I am straightening it,
“_Jadjumong_ me _jadjio_ leh.”
“To straighten I am straightening it.”
Verbs are invariably used thus, interrogatively, and, generally, in
replies. I said almost peculiar, because I think this pleonasm is
identified in the Greek idiom, “Ουχι μενον σοι εμενε. Remaining, did it
not remain to thee.”
The Accra has the present, imperfect, perfect, and future tenses: the
imperfect and future being distinguished by the prefixes _bleh_ and
_ah_, the one before, the other after the pronoun.
“me yāyne. bleh me yayne. me yăy. m’ahye.”
I eat it. I was eating it. I eat. I will eat.
But the imperfect tense is never used, unless a sentence precedes it, as
“Bennay heh bă bleh me yay.”
“When he came I was eating.”
Otherwise, they use the perfect for the imperfect, never replying to a
question even, in the latter. The perfect is only distinguished from the
present by being pronounced short. These explicative particles, _bleh_
and _ah_, would, no doubt, be found to be remnants of verbs of
appropriate signification, as the _ai_ of the French future is derived
from _avoir_, were any philologist sufficiently acquainted with the
languages to investigate them. _Ne_, signifying it or thing, is adjoined
to many verbs, frequently in the present tense only, like the
explicative particle _en_ conjugated with “_aller_.”
The Fantee has a present, perfect, and pluperfect: as “me dedee,” I eat,
“me adee,” I have eaten, “me waya dedee,” I had eat. It has no future,
yet the time is marked precisely, by adding _soon_, _to-morrow_, &c. to
the present.
Neither language has participles; for, I see him coming, the Accras
would say, according to their idiom,
“Minnā eh ba’lheh.”
“I see his coming.”
_Ba_ being a noun, with the definite article _lheh_ affixed. The Fantees
would say,
“Mehoon deh orraba.”
“I see that he comes.”
Many verbs in the Accra language are conjugated like reflectives, though
they are not so in their nature, as
“Me nakoo me fai lheh
I not I did it, for I did not do it.
In the Accra, _ko_, the contraction of _nakoo_, (not,) is added to verbs
as a negative, as “_meyayko_,” I did not eat; yet, in some instances,
they have distinct verbs to express the negative of the action, as
“_mahttay_,” I will go, “_meyang_,” I will not go.
The Fantee prefixes _neën_, not, as “_me dedee_,” I eat, “_me neën
dedee_,” I do not eat; and they have also, apparently, distinct negative
verbs, as “_me becko_,” I go, “_me’nkoko_,” I do not go.
The Accra resembles the Greek in the nice distinctions of some of its
verbs and nouns.
Gnăghmong To salute in the morning.
Cotaghmong To roll up.
Balbaghtoomong To draw towards
Tehtemong To gather up
Kakow The tooth ache (_nanyong_ a tooth)
Kodjomong To talk a palaver
Song To work as a smith }
} neechoomong to work
Ghnāmong mechanic }
Ninnamong To separate weeds from earth
The Accra and Fantee interjections are generally parts of sentences, as,
Mr. Horne Tooke has shewn most of our own to be: “_minnannako_,” what do
I see now, “_me ä whoo!_” I die, “_màdja!_” oh my father, equally
responsive to grief, joy, or surprise; and used as involuntarily, and as
frequently as the two syllables _boh_, _hah_, which answer to our _oh_,
and _ah_, and which, of course, cannot be called words. An Ashantee
striking his foot against a stone, or any thing in his way, exclaims
“the thing is mad.”
I was surprised to find little, or no inversion in the Accra or Fantee
prose[118]; the substantive precedes the adjective, but there is
scarcely any other trace of it: yet, it is one of their poetical
licenses, as may be instanced in the following line of a Fantee song;
“Abirrikirri croom ogah odum.”
Foreign town fire put in,
for “the foreign town is set on fire.” In addition to this inversion, so
many peculiar additives, (generally vowels,) and inflexions are allowed,
as well as the figures Synæresis, Diæresis, Metathesis, and Anastrophe,
in their poetry, and in their poetry only, (making it unintelligible
even to those who can converse fluently with them) that both languages
may be said to have a Prosody. From the following song, I imagined the
Fantees (for the Accra’s are said to possess none but fetish hymns in
their own language) to have some idea of rhyme, considering the
inversion of the first line as forced, and expressly accommodated to the
metre,
Abirrikirri croom ogah odum,
Ocoontinkiï bonoo fum,
Cooroompun,
Coom agwun,
but I have not met with any other instance.
The Ashantees generally use much and vehement gesture, and speak in
recitative: their action is exuberant, but graceful; and from the
infancy of the language,[119] nouns and verbs are constantly repeated,
for force, and distinction, as _one one_, for, _one by one_, or, _each_;
_one tokoo one tokoo_, for, _one tokoo a-piece_. They frequently are
obliged to vary the tone, in pronouncing a word which has more than one
meaning, as the Chinese do. They have no expression short of you are a
liar, and the king was surprised, when I told him we made a great
difference between a mistake and a lie; he said the truth was not spoken
in either case, and, therefore, it was the same thing; they did not
consider the motive but only the fact.
Like the American languages, those of this part of Africa, are full of
figures, hyperbolical and picturesque.[120] One of the kings of the
interior, whose territories the Ashantees had long talked of invading,
sent forty pots of palm oil to Coomassie, with the message, that, “he
feared they could not find their way, so he sent the oil to light them.”
The Accras instead of good night, say “_wooäu d’tcherrimong_,” sleep
till the lighting of the world: one of their imprecations against their
enemies, is, “may their hiding place be our flute,” that is, “our
plaything:” when they speak of a man imposing on them, they say, “he
turned the backs of our heads into our mouths.” Having occasion, whilst
at Coomassie, to protest against the conduct of an individual, the king
replied, through Adoosee, “The horse comes from the bush, and is a fool,
but the man who rides him knows sense, and by and by makes him do what
he wishes; you, by yourself, made the horse, who was a fool, do better
the other day, therefore, three of you ought to teach a man, who is not
born a fool, and does not come from the bush, to do what you know to be
right by and by, though I see he does wrong now.” Other instances will
appear in their songs.
I shall transfer the imperfect Vocabularies which I formed, and the
incidental observations, to the Appendix; as they may not be indulged
with so much attention by the generality of readers, as the
investigation of the structure.
[Footnote 111: The eastern and western branch of this polar race, the
Eskimoes and the Tschougazes, notwithstanding the enormous distance of
800 leagues which separates them, are united by the most intimate
analogy of languages. This analogy extends, as has been recently proved
in the most evident manner, even to the inhabitants of the north-east of
Asia; for the idiom of the Tschouktshes at the mouth of the Anadin has
the same roots, as the language of the Eskimoes who inhabit the coast of
America opposite to Europe. The Tschouktsches are the Eskimoes of Asia.
Humbolt, P. N. v. 3, p. 291.]
[Footnote 112: “I am aware that languages are much more strongly
characterised by their structure and grammatical forms, than by the
analogy of their sounds and of their roots; and that their analogy of
sounds is sometimes so disfigured in the different dialects of the same
tongue, as not to be distinguishable; for the tribes into which a nation
is divided, often designate the same objects by words altogether
heterogeneous. Hence it follows, that we are easily mistaken, if,
neglecting the study of the inflexions, and consulting only the roots,
for instance the words which designate the moon, sky, water, and earth,
we decide on the absolute difference of two idioms from the simple want
of resemblance in sounds.” Humboldt’s Personal Narrative, vol. iii. p.
251.
I am gratified to find, since my return to England, and consequent
perusal of the Congo publication, that my investigations of these
languages have happened to be consonant with the instructions of Mr.
Marsden in his letter to Captain Tuckey, as appears from the following
extract. “Where a longer residence admits of freer intercourse, and a
means of acquiring a more perfect knowledge of the language, it will be
desirable, besides attempting to fill up the larger vocabulary, that
pains should be taken to examine its grammatical structure, and to
ascertain, for instance, how the nominative and subjunctive words in a
sentence are placed with respect to the verb; how the adjective with
regard to the substantive; how plurals and degrees of comparison are
formed; whether there is any kind of inflexion or variation of syllables
of the same word, according to its position in the sentence and
connection with other words; whether the pronouns personal vary
according to the rank or sex of the person addressing or person
addressed; and whether they are incorporated with the verb; and to
observe any other peculiarities of idiom, that the language may present;
noting the degree of softness, harshness, indistinctness, intonation,
guttural sounds, and the prevalence or deficiency of any particular
letters of the alphabet, as we should term them, such as R and F. The
extent of country over which a language is understood to prevail should
also be a subject of investigation; and, by what others it is bounded on
every side. Also, whether there may not be a correct language of
communication between nations, whose proper languages are distinct.” I
think the very frequent use of _q_ is one distinguishing character of
African languages: the _r_ and _f_ are very frequent, the latter
especially; the former as a liquid is frequently substituted for _l_, as
I have illustrated in the Chapter on Geography. Their pronunciation of
_z_ approximates to that of the _aspro z_ of the Italians. I hope to
have leisure and opportunity hereafter for paying this subject more
attention. I have not yet had time to make sufficient progress in German
to read Vater’s Mithridatis, which will no doubt assist my
observations.]
[Footnote 113: “From the Hebrew עתה, ote, _time_, has flowed ὁτε,
_when_; which τ, π, οπ, being prefixed, becomes τοτε, ποτε, ὁποτε.”]
[Footnote 114: “Every verb consists of a pronoun, expressing an agent,
and of a noun, or the substitute of a noun, expressing an object. Thus,
οινος and εγω joined and abbreviated is οινοω; and this term would be
sufficient to express _I drink wine_, though originally it meant only
_wine I_; association supplying to the speaker and the person addressed
the intermediate notion _of drinking_.” Jones.]
[Footnote 115: The word _caboceer_ (_chief_,) which I have used in the
correspondence, history, and other parts of this work, as the only title
familiar to Europeans, (being always substituted, even by native
interpreters for the vernacular,) was of course introduced by the
Portuguese, and consequently unknown in the interior. It is applied to a
chief who has the charge or government of a town, (_croom_.) Such
however are indiscriminately called _ōhen_ or _king_, in Fantee.
Throughout Ashantee the monarch only is called _ōhennie_ or _king_, and
the chiefs who have the care or government of the towns of his
dominions, _sāf ĕhen_. _Sāfie_ or _saphwooa_, means _key_, and the last
syllable of the compound, _hen_, is evidently an abbreviation of
_ōhennie_. _Safie_, a _charm_, is without doubt identical in a
figurative sense with _sāfee_, _key_; and should, on consideration, be
spelt as such, and not _saphie_ as I have generally written it hitherto.
A Moor is called _Crambo_ by the Negroes of the interior, which bears
the same interpretation as _Pongheme_, a Spaniard, in the Tamanack, i.e.
_a man clothed_.]
[Footnote 116: It is also found in the Empoönga, and other African
languages.]
[Footnote 117: “The distinction of active and passive is not essential
to verbs. In the infancy of language, it was in all probability not
known; in Hebrew, the difference but imperfectly exists, and in the
early periods of it, possibly did not exist at all. In Arabic, the only
distinction which obtains, arises from the vowel points, a late
invention compared with the antiquity of that language. And in our own
tongue the names of active and passive would have remained unknown, if
they had not been learnt in Latin.” Jones.]
[Footnote 118: “He (the savage) would not express himself according to
our English order of construction, Give me fruit, but according to the
Latin order, Fruit give me, Fructum da mihi, for this plain reason, that
his attention was wholly directed towards fruit, the desired object.
This was the exciting idea; the object which moved him to speak, and of
course would be the first named. Such an arrangement is precisely
putting into words the gesture which nature taught the savage to make,
before he was acquainted with words; and therefore it may be depended
upon as certain, that he would fall most readily into this arrangement.
· · · · · · We might therefore conclude, à priori, that this would be
the order in which things were most commonly arranged at the beginning
of language, and accordingly we find, in fact, that in this order words
are arranged in most of the antient tongues; as in the Greek and the
Latin; and it is also said, in the Russian, the Sclavonic, the Gaelic,
and several of the American tongues.” Blair.
The arrangement of words in the Chayma is such as is found in every
language of both continents, which has preserved a certain air of youth.
The object is placed before the verb, the verb before the personal
pronoun. The object on which the attention should be principally fixed,
precedes all the modifications of that object.
The American would say; “liberty complete love we;” instead of we love
complete liberty; “Thee with happy am I”—instead of I am happy with
thee. Humboldt’s Personal Narrative, vol. 3, p. 261.]
[Footnote 119: “In the infancy of language, while words were yet scanty,
the most natural way, whereby a writer or speaker might give an
additional force to his discourse, was to _repeat_ such terms as he
wished to render _emphatic_. The more ancient any language is, the more
numerous appear the traces of such repetitions; and next to the Hebrew,
they form a remarkable feature in the Greek tongue. This μαω μαω, I
desire desire, blended into one word, become μιμαω, and mean, I greatly
desire. βαω βαω, I walk walk, βιβαω, I stride, &c. &c. &c. See Jones.]
[Footnote 120: “The messenger concluded this insulting notification by
presenting the king with a pair of iron sandals, at the same time
adding, that until such time as Daisy had worn out these sandals in his
flight, he should never be secure from the arrows of Bambarra.” Park’s
1st Mission.]