These difficulties, which were felt the most strongly when the thought

and feeling that had been at home in the Hebrew, the original language

of inspiration, needed to be transferred into Greek, reappeared, though

not in quite so aggravated a form, when that which had gradually woven

for itself in the Greek an adequate clothing, again demanded to find a

suitable garment in the Latin. An example of the difficulty, and of the

way in which the difficulty was ultimately overcome, will illustrate

this far better than long disquisitions. The classical language of

Greece had a word for 'saviour' which, though often degraded to

unworthy uses, bestowed as a title of honour not merely on the false

gods of heathendom, but sometimes on men, such as better deserved to be

styled 'destroyers' than 'saviours' of their fellows, was yet in itself

not unequal to the setting forth the central office and dignity of Him,

who came into the world to _save_ it. The word might be likened to some

profaned temple, which needed a new consecration, but not to be

abolished, and another built in its room. With the Latin it was

otherwise. The language seemed to lack a word, which on one account or

another Christians needed continually to utter: indeed Cicero, than

whom none could know better the resources of his own tongue, remarkably

enough had noted its want of any single equivalent to the Greek

'saviour.' [Footnote: Hoc [Greek: soter] quantum est? ita magnum ut

Latinè uno verbo exprimi non possit.] 'Salvator' would have been the

natural word; but the classical Latin of the best times, though it had

'salus' and 'salvus,' had neither this, nor the verb 'salvare'; some,

indeed, have thought that 'salvare' had always existed in the common

speech. 'Servator' was instinctively felt to be insufficient, even as

'Preserver' would for us fall very short of uttering all which

'Saviour' does now. The seeking of the strayed, the recovery of the

lost, the healing of the sick, would all be but feebly and faintly

suggested by it, if suggested at all. God '_preserveth_ man and beast,'

but He is the 'Saviour' of his own in a more inward and far more

endearing sense. It was long before the Latin Christian writers

extricated themselves from this embarrassment, for the 'Salutificator'

of Tertullian, the 'Sospitator' of another, assuredly did not satisfy

the need. The strong good sense of Augustine finally disposed of the

difficulty. He made no scruple about using 'Salvator'; observing with a

true insight into the conditions under which new words should be

admitted, that however 'Salvator' might not have been good Latin before

the Saviour came, He by his coming and by the work had made it such;

for, as shadows wait upon substances, so words wait upon things.

[Footnote: _Serm_. 299. 6: Christus Jesus, id est Christus Salvator:

hoc est enim Latine Jesus. Nec quaerant grammatici quam sit Latinum,

sed Christiani, quam verum. Salus enim Latinum nomen est; salvare et

salvator non fuerunt haec Latina, antequam veniret Salvator: quando ad

Latinos venit, et haec Latina fecit. Cf. _De Trin_. 13. 10: Quod verbum

[salvator] Latina lingua antea non habebat, sed habere poterat; sicut

potuit quando voluit. Other words which we owe to Christian Latin,

probably to the Vulgate or to the earlier Latin translations, are

these--'carnalis,' 'clarifico,' 'compassio,' 'deitas' (Augustine, _Civ.

Dei_, 7. i), 'glorifico,' 'idololatria,' 'incarnatio,' 'justifico,'

'justificatio,' 'longanimitas,' 'mortifico,' 'magnalia,' 'mundicors,'

'passio,' 'praedestinatio,' 'refrigerium' (Ronsch, _Vulgata_, p. 321),

'regeneratio,' 'resipiscentia,' 'revelatio,' 'sanctificatio,'

'soliloquium,' 'sufficientia,' 'supererogatio,' 'tribulatio.' Many of

these may seem barbarous to the Latin scholar, but there is hardly one

of them which does not imply a new thought, or a new feeling, or the

sense of a new relation of man to God or to his fellow-man. Strange too

and significant that heathen Latin could get as far as 'peccare' and

'peccatum,' but stopped short of 'peccator' and 'peccatrix.'] Take

another example. It seemed so natural a thing, in the old heathen world,

to expose infants, where it was not found convenient to rear them, the

crime excited so little remark, was so little regarded as a crime at

all, that it seemed not worth the while to find a name for it; and thus

it came to pass that the word 'infanticidium' was first born in the

bosom of the Christian Church, Tertullian being the earliest in whose

writings it appears.

Yet it is not only when new truth, moral or spiritual, has thus to fit

itself to the lips of men, that such enlargements of speech become

necessary: but in each further unfolding of those seminal truths

implanted in man at the first, in each new enlargement of his sphere of

knowledge, outward or inward, the same necessities make themselves felt.

The beginnings and progressive advances of moral philosophy in Greece,

[Footnote: See Lobeck, _Phrynichus_, p. 350.] the transplantation of

the same to Rome, the rise of the scholastic, and then of the mystic,

theology in the Middle Ages, the discoveries of modern science and

natural philosophy, these each and all have been accompanied with

corresponding extensions in the domain of language. Of the words to

which each of these has in turn given birth, many, it is true, have

never travelled beyond their own peculiar sphere, having remained

purely technical, or scientific, or theological to the last; but many,

too, have passed over from the laboratory and the school, from the

cloister and the pulpit, into everyday use, and have, with the ideas

which they incorporate, become the common heritage of all. For however

hard and repulsive a front any study or science may present to the

great body of those who are as laymen in regard of it, there is yet

inevitably such a detrition as this continually going forward, and one

which it would be well worth while to trace in detail.

Where the movement is a popular one, stirring the heart and mind of a

people to its depths, there these new words will for the most part

spring out of their bosom, a free spontaneous birth, seldom or never

capable of being referred to one man more than another, because in a

manner they belong to all. Where, on the contrary, the movement is more

strictly theological, or has for its sphere those regions of science

and philosophy, where, as first pioneers and discoverers, only a few

can bear their part, there the additions to the language and extensions

of it will lack something of the freedom, the unconscious boldness,

which mark the others. Their character will be more artificial, less

spontaneous, although here also the creative genius of a single man, as

there of a nation, will oftentimes set its mark; and many a single word

will come forth, which will be the result of profound meditation, or of

intuitive genius, or of both in happiest combination--many a word,

which shall as a torch illuminate vast regions comparatively obscure

before, and, it may be, cast its rays far into the yet unexplored

darkness beyond; or which, summing up into itself all the acquisitions

in a particular direction of the past, shall furnish a mighty vantage-

ground from which to advance to new conquests in those realms of mind

or of nature, not as yet subdued to the intellect and uses of man.

'Cosmopolite' has often now a shallow or even a mischievous use; and he

who calls himself 'cosmopolite' may mean no more than that he is _not_

a patriot, that his native country does _not_ possess his love. Yet, as

all must admit, he could have been no common man who, before the

preaching of the Gospel, launched this word upon the world, and claimed

this name for himself. Nor was he a common man; for Diogenes the Cynic,

whose sayings are among quite the most notable in antiquity, was its

author. Being demanded of what city or country he was, Diogenes

answered that he was a 'cosmopolite'; in this word widening the range

of men's thoughts, bringing in not merely a word new to Greek ears, but

a thought which, however commonplace and familiar to us now, must have

been most novel and startling to those whom he addressed. I am far from

asserting that contempt for his citizenship in its narrower sense may

not have mingled with this his challenge for himself of a citizenship

wide as the world; but there was not the less a very remarkable

reaching out here after truths which were not fully born into the world

until _He_ came, in whom and in whose Church all national differences

and distinctions are done away.

As occupying somewhat of a middle place between those more deliberate

word-makers and the multitude whose words rather grow of themselves

than are made, we must not omit him who is a _maker_ by the very right

of his name--I mean, the poet. That creative energy with which he is

endowed, 'the high-flying liberty of conceit proper to the poet,' will

not fail to manifest itself in this region as in others. Extending the

domain of thought and feeling, he will scarcely fail to extend that

also of language, which does not willingly lag behind. And the loftier

his moods, the more of this maker he will be. The passion of such times,

the all-fusing imagination, will at once suggest and justify audacities

in speech, upon which in calmer moods he would not have ventured, or,

venturing, would have failed to carry others with him: for it is only

the fluent metal that runs easily into novel shapes and moulds. Nor is

it merely that the old and the familiar will often become new in the

poet's hands; that he will give the stamp of allowance, as to him will

be free to do, to words which hitherto have lived only on the lips of

the people, or been confined to some single dialect and province; but

he will enrich his native tongue with words unknown and non-existent

before--non-existent, that is, save in their elements; for in the

historic period of a language it is not permitted to any man to do more

than work on pre-existent materials; to evolve what is latent therein,

to combine what is apart, to recall what has fallen out of sight.

But to return to the more deliberate coining of words. New necessities

have within the last few years called out several of these deliberate

creations in our own language. The almost simultaneous discovery of

such large abundance of gold in so many quarters of the world led some

nations so much to dread an enormous depreciation of this metal, that

they ceased to make it the standard of value--Holland for instance did

so for a while, though she has since changed her mind; and it has been

found convenient to invent a word, 'to demonetize' to express this

process of turning a precious metal from being the legal standard into

a mere article of commerce. So, too, diplomacy has recently added more

than one new word to our vocabulary. I suppose nobody ever heard of

'extradition' till within the last few years; nor of 'neutralization'

except, it might be, in some treatise upon chemistry, till in the

treaty of peace which followed the Crimean War the 'neutralization' of

the Black Sea was made one of the stipulations. 'Secularization,' in

like manner, owes its birth to the long and weary negotiations which

preceded the Treaty of Westphalia (1648). Whenever it proved difficult

to find anywhere else compensation for some powerful claimant, there

was always some abbey or bishopric which with its revenues might be

seized, stripped of its ecclesiastical character, and turned into a

secular possession. Our manifold points of contact with the East, the

necessity that has thus arisen of representing oriental words to the

western world by means of an alphabet not its own, with the manifold

discussions on the fittest equivalents, all this has brought with it

the need of a word which should describe the process, and

'transliteration' is the result.

We have long had 'assimilation' in our dictionaries; 'dissimilation'

has as yet scarcely found its way into them, but it speedily will. [It

has already appeared in our books on language. [Footnote: See Skeat's

_Etym. Dict_. (s. v. _truffle_). Pott (_Etym. Forsch_. vol. ii. p. 65)

introduced the word 'dissimilation' into German.]] Advances in

philology have rendered it a matter of necessity that we should possess

a term to designate a certain process which words unconsciously undergo,

and no other would designate it at all so well. There is a process of

'assimilation' going on very extensively in language; the organs of

speech finding themselves helped by changing one letter for another

which has just occurred, or will just occur in a word; thus we say not

'a_df_iance,' but 'a_ff_iance,' not 're_n_ow_m_,' as our ancestors did

when 'renom' was first naturalized, but 're_n_ow_n_'; we say too,

though we do not write it, 'cu_b_board' and not 'cu_p_board,'

'su_t_tle' and not 'su_b_tle.' But side by side with this there is

another opposite process, where some letter would recur too often for

euphony or ease in speaking, were the strict form of the word too

closely held fast; and where consequently this letter is exchanged for

some other, generally for some nearly allied; thus 'cae_r_uleus' was

once 'cae_l_uleus,' from caelum [Footnote: The connexion of _caeruleus_

with _caelum_ is not at all certain.] 'me_r_idies' is for 'me_d_idies/

or medius dies. In the same way the Italians prefer 've_l_eno' to

've_n_eno'; the Germans '_k_artoffel' to '_t_artüffel,' from Italian

'tartufola' = Latin terrae tuber, an old name of the potato; and we

'cinnamo_n_' to 'cinnamo_m_' (the earlier form). So too in 'turtle,'

'marble,' 'purple,' we have shrunk from the double '_r_' of 'turtur,'

'marmor,' 'purpura.' [Footnote: See Dwight, _Modern Philology_, 2nd

Series, p. 100; Heyse, _System der Sprachwissenschaft_, Section 139-

141; and Peile, _Introduction to Greek and Latin Etymology_, pp. 357-

379.] New necessities, new evolutions of society into more complex

conditions, evoke new words; which come forth, because they are

required now; but did not formerly exist, because in an anterior period

they were not required. For example, in Greece so long as the poet sang

his own verses, 'singer' (aoidos) sufficiently expressed the double

function; such a 'singer' was Homer, and such Homer describes Demodocus,

the bard of the Phaeacians; that double function, in fact, not being in

his time contemplated as double, but each of its parts so naturally

completing the other, that no second word was required. When, however,

in the division of labour one made the verses which another chaunted,

then 'poet' or 'maker,' a word unknown to the Homeric age, arose. In

like manner, when 'physicians' were the only natural philosophers, the

word covered this meaning as well as that other which it still retains;

but when the investigation of nature and natural causes detached itself

from the art of healing, became an independent study, the name

'physician' remained to that which was as the stock and stem of the art,

while the new offshoot sought out and obtained a new name for itself.

But it is not merely new things which will require new names. It will

often be discovered that old things have not got a name at all, or,

having one, are compelled to share it with something else, often to the

serious embarrassment of both. The manner in which men become aware of

such deficiencies, is commonly this. Comparing their own language with

another, and in some aspects a richer, compelled, it may be, to such

comparison through having undertaken to transfer treasures of that

language into their own, they become conscious of much worthy to be

uttered in human speech, and plainly utterable therein, since another

language has found utterance for it; but which hitherto has found no

voice in their own. Hereupon with more or less success they proceed to

supply the deficiency. Hardly in any other way would the wants in this

way revealed make themselves felt even by the most thoughtful; for

language is to so large an extent the condition and limit of thought,

men are so little accustomed, indeed so little able, to contemplate

things, except through the intervention, and by the machinery, of words,

that the absence of words from a language almost necessarily brings

with it the absence of any sense of that absence. Here is one advantage

of acquaintance with other languages besides our own, and of the

institution that will follow, if we have learned those other to any

profit, of such comparisons, namely, that we thus become aware that

names are not, and least of all the names in any one language, co-

extensive with things (and by 'things' I mean subjects as well as

objects of thought, whatever one can _think_ about), that innumerable

things and aspects of things exist, which, though capable of being

resumed and connoted in a word, are yet without one, unnamed and

unregistered; and thus, vast as may be the world of names, that the

world of realities, and of realities which are nameable, is vaster

still. Such discoveries the Romans made, when they sought to transplant

the moral philosophy of Greece to an Italian soil. They discovered that

many of its terms had no equivalents with them; which equivalents

thereupon they proceeded to devise for themselves, appealing for this

to the latent capabilities of their own tongue. For example, the Greek

schools had a word, and one playing no unimportant part in some of

their philosophical systems, to express 'apathy' or the absence of all

passion and pain. As it was absolutely necessary to possess a

corresponding word, Cicero invented 'indolentia,' as that 'if I may so

speak' with which he paves the way to his first introduction of it,

sufficiently declares. [Footnote: _Fin_. ii. 4; and for 'qualitas' see

_Acad_. i. 6.] Sometimes, indeed, such a skilful mint-master of words,

such a subtle watcher and weigher of their force as was Cicero,

[Footnote: Ille verborum vigilantissimus appensor ac mensor, as

Augustine happily terms him.] will have noticed even apart from this

comparison with other languages, an omission in his own, which

thereupon he will endeavour to supply. Thus the Latin had two

adjectives which, though not kept apart as strictly as they might have

been, possessed each its peculiar meaning, 'invidus' one who is envious,

'invidiosus' one who excites envy in others; [Footnote: Thus the

monkish line:

_Invidiosus_ ego, non _invidus_ esse laboro.] at the same time

there was only one substantive, 'invidia' the correlative of them both;

with the disadvantage, therefore, of being employed now in an active,

now in a passive sense, now for the envy which men feel, and now for

the envy which they excite. The word he saw was made to do double duty;

under a seeming unity there lurked a real dualism, from which manifold

confusions might follow. He therefore devised 'invidentia,' to express

the active envy, or the envying, no doubt desiring that 'invidia'

should be restrained to the passive, the being envied. 'Invidentia' to

all appearance supplied a real want; yet Cicero himself did not succeed

in giving it currency; does not seem himself to have much cared to

employ it again. [Footnote: _Tusc._ iii. 9; iv. 8; cf. Döderlein,

_Synon._ vol. iii, p. 68.] We see by this example that not every word,

which even an expert in language proposes, finds acceptance; [Footnote:

Quintilian's advice, based on this fact, is good (i. 6. 42): Etiamsi

potest nihil peccare, qui utitur iis verbis quae summi auctores

tradiderunt, multum tamen refert non solum quid _dixerint_, sed etiam

quid _persuaserint_. He himself, as he informs us, invented 'vocalitas'

to correspond with the Greek [Greek: euphonia] (_Instit._ i. 5. 24),

but I am not conscious that he found any imitators here.] for, as

Dryden, treating on this subject, has well observed, 'It is one thing

to draw a bill, and another to have it accepted.' Provided some words

live, he must be content that others should fall to the ground and die.

Nor is this the only unsuccessful candidate for admission into the

language which Cicero put forward. His 'indolentia' which I mentioned

just now, hardly passed beyond himself; [Footnote: Thus Seneca a little

later is unaware, or has forgotten, that Cicero made any such

suggestion. Taking no notice of it, he proposes 'impatientia' as an

adequate rendering of [Greek: apatheia]. There clung this inconvenience

to the word, as he himself allowed, that it was already used in exactly

the opposite sense (_Ep_. 9). Elsewhere he claims to be the inventor of

'essentia' (_Ep_. 38;.)] his 'vitiositas,' [Footnote: _Tusc_. iv. 15.]

'indigentia,' [Footnote: _Ibid_. iv. 9. 21.] and 'mulierositas,'

[Footnote: _Ibid_. iv. ii.] not at all. 'Beatitas' too and 'beatitudo,'

[Footnote: Nat. Dear. i. 34.] both of his coining, yet, as he owns

himself, with something strange and unattractive about them, found

almost no acceptance at all in the classical literature of Rome:

'beatitude,' indeed, obtained a home, as it deserved to do, in the

Christian Church, but 'beatitas' none. Coleridge's 'esemplastic,' by

which he was fain to express the all-atoning or unifying power of the

imagination, has not pleased others at all in the measure in which it

pleased himself; while the words of Jeremy Taylor, of such Latinists as

Sir Thomas Browne and Henry More, born only to die, are multitudinous

as the fallen leaves of autumn. [Footnote: See my _English Past and

Present_, 13th edit. p. 113.] Still even the word which fails is often

an honourable testimony to the scholarship, or the exactness of thought,

or the imagination of its author; and Ben Jonson is over-hard on

'neologists,' if I may bring this term back to its earlier meaning,

when he says: 'A man coins not a new word without some peril, and less

fruit; for if it happen to be received, the praise is but moderate; if

refused, the scorn is assured,' [Footnote: Therefore the maxim: Moribus

antiquis, praesentibus utere verbis.]

I spoke just now of comprehensive words, which should singly say what

hitherto it had taken many words to say, in which a higher term has

been reached than before had been attained. The value of these is

incalculable. By the cutting short of lengthy explanations and tedious

circuits of language, they facilitate mental processes, such as would

often have been nearly or quite impossible without them; and such as

have invented or put these into circulation, are benefactors of a high

order to knowledge. In the ordinary traffic of life, unless our

dealings are on the smallest scale, we willingly have about us our

money in the shape rather of silver than of copper; and if our

transactions are at all extensive, rather in gold than in silver: while,

if we were setting forth upon a long and costly journey, we should be

best pleased to turn even our gold coin itself into bills of exchange

or circular notes; in fact, into the highest denomination of money

which it was capable of assuming. How many words with which we are now

perfectly familiar are for us what the circular note or bill of

exchange is for the traveller or the merchant. As innumerable pence, a

multitude of shillings, not a few pounds are gathered up and

represented by one of these, so have we in some single word the

quintessence and final result of an infinite number of anterior mental

processes, ascending one above the other, until all have been at length

summed up for us in that single word. This last may be compared to

nothing so fitly as to some mighty river, which does not bring its

flood of waters to the sea, till many rills have been swallowed up in

brooks, and brooks in streams, and streams in tributary rivers, each of

these affluents having lost its separate name and existence in that

which at last represents and contains them all.

On the Study of Words · 第 12 / 20 段