changes as evolved by some unknown process from the body of the
noun, as the branches of a tree spring from the stem—or as elements,
unmeaning in themselves, but employed arbitrarily or conventionally
to modify the meanings of words. This latter view is countenanced by
Schlegel. ‘Languages with inflexions,’ says Schlegel, ‘are organic
languages, because they include a living principle of development
and increase, and alone possess, if I may so express myself, a
fruitful and abundant vegetation. The wonderful mechanism of these
languages consists in forming an immense variety of words, and in
marking the connection of ideas expressed by these words by the help
of an inconsiderable number of syllables, _which, viewed separately,
have no signification_, but which determine with precision the sense
of the words to which they are attached. By modifying radical
letters and by adding derivative syllables to the roots, derivative
words of various sorts are formed, and derivatives from those
derivatives. Words are compounded from several roots to express
complex ideas. Finally, substantives, adjectives, and pronouns are
declined, with gender, number, and case; verbs are conjugated
throughout voices, moods, tenses, numbers, and persons, by
employing, in like manner, terminations and sometimes augments,
which by themselves signify nothing. This method is attended with
the advantage of enunciating in a single word the principal idea,
frequently greatly modified, and extremely complex already, with its
whole array of accessory ideas and mutable
relations.’ ”—_Transactions of the Philological Society_, vol. ii.
p. 39.
206 Endlicher, Chinesische Grammatik, p. 172.
207 Endlicher, Chinesische Grammatik, s. 172.
208 “The Algonquins have but one case which may be called locative.” Du
Ponceau, p. 158.
209 Marsh, p. 579.
210 In Old Portuguese, Diez mentions _senhor rainha, mia sennor
formosa_, my beautiful mistress.
211 Marsh, p. 387. Barnes, Poems in Dorsetshire Dialect.
212 Survey of Languages, p. 21.
213 Fuchs, Romanische Sprachen, s. 344.
214 The Greek term for the future is ὁ μέλλων, and μέλλω is used as an
auxiliary verb to form certain futures in Greek. It has various
meanings, but they can all be traced back to the Sanskrit _man_
(_manyate_), to think. As _anya_, other, is changed to ἄλλος, so
_manye_, I think, to μέλλω. Il. ii. 39: θήσειν ἔτ᾽ ἔμελλεν ἐπ ἀλγέα
τε στοναchάς τε Τρωσί τε καὶ Δαναοῖσι, “he still thought to lay
sufferings on Trojans and Greeks.” Il. xxiii. 544: μέλλεις
ἀφαιρήσεσθαι ἄεθλον, “thou thinkest thou wouldst have stripped me of
the prize.” Od. xiii. 293: οὐκ ἄρ᾽ ἔμελλες λήξειν; “did you not
think of stopping?” _i.e._ were you not going to stop? Or again in
such phrases as Il. ii. 36, τὰ οὐ τελέσεσθαι ἔμελλον, “these things
were not meant to be accomplished,” literally, these things did not
mean to be accomplished. Thus μέλλω was used of things that were
likely to be, as if these things themselves meant or intended to be
or not to be; and, the original meaning being forgotten, μέλλω came
to be a mere auxiliary expressing probability. Μέλλω and μέλλομαι,
in the sense of “to hesitate,” are equally explained by the Sanskrit
_man_, to think or consider. In Old Norse the future is likewise
formed by _mun_, to mean.
215 Bopp, Comp. Grammar, § 620. Grimm, German Grammar, ii. 845.
216 Barnes, Dorsetshire Dialect, p. 39.
217 See M. M.’s Letter on the Turanian Languages, pp. 44, 46.
218 Sk. _dama_; Gr. δόμος; L. _domus_; Slav. _domü_; Celt. _daimh_.
219 See M. M.’s Essay on Comparative Mythology, Oxford Essays, 1856.
220 Ârya-bhûmi, and Ârya-deśa are used in the same sense.
221 Pân. iii. 1, 103.
222 In one of the Vedas, _arya_ with a short _a_ is used like _ârya_, as
opposed to Śûdra. For we read (Vâj-San. xx. 17): “Whatever sin we
have committed in the village, in the forest, in the home, in the
open air, against a Śûdra, against an Arya,—thou art our
deliverance.”
223 Lassen, Ind. Alt. b. i. s. 6.
224 Ibid. b. i. s. 526.
225 Ptolemy knows Ἀριάκαι, near the mouth of the Yaxartes. Ptol. vi. 14;
Lassen, loc. cit. i. 6.
226 Burnouf, Yaśna, notes, 61. In the same sense the Zend-avesta uses
the expression, Aryan provinces, “airyanâm daqyunâm” gen. plur., or
“airyâo dainhâvô,” provincias Arianas. Burnouf, Yaśna, 442; and
Notes, p. 70
227 Burnouf, Notes, p. 62.
228 Strabo, xi. 7, 11. Plin. Hist. Nat. vi. 19. Ptol. vi. 2. De Sacy,
Mémoires sur diverses antiquités de la Perse, p. 48. Lassen,
Indische Alterthumskunde, i. 6.
229 Strabo. xi. 11; Burnouf, Notes, p. 110. “In another place
Eratosthenes is cited as describing the western boundary to be a
line separating Parthiene from Media, and Karmania from Parætakene
and Persia, thus taking in Yezd and Kerman, but excluding
Fars.”—_Wilson, Ariana antiqua_, p. 120.
230 Hellanicus, fragm. 166, ed. Müller. Ἄρια Περσικὴ χώρα.
231 Joseph Müller, Journal Asiatique, 1839, p. 298. Lassen, loc. cit. i.
6. From this the Elam of Genesis. Mélanges Asiatiques, i. p. 623.
232 Heeren, Ideen, i. p. 337: ὁμόγλωττοι παρὰ μικρόν. Strabo, p. 1054.
233 One of the Median classes is called Ἀριζαντοί, which may be
_âryajantu_. Herod, i. 101.
234 Μάγοι δὲ καὶ πὰν τὸ Ἄρειον γένος, ὡς καὶ τοῦτο γράφει ὁ Εὔδημος, οἱ
μὲν, τόπον, οἱ δὲ χρόνον καλοῦσι τὸ νοητὸν ἅπαν καὶ τὸ ἡνωμένον; ἐξ
οὐ διακριθῆναι ἡ θεὸν ἀγαθὸν καὶ δαίμονα κακὸν ἢ φῶς καὶ σκότος πρὸ
τούτων, ὡσ ἐνίους λέγειν. Οὐτοι δὲ οὖν καὶ αὐτοὶ μετὰ τὴν ἀδιάκριτον
φύσιν διακρινομένην ποιοῦσι τὴν διττὴν συστοιχὴν τῶν κρειττόνων, τῆς
μὲν ἡγεῖσθαι τὸν Ὀρομάσδη, τῆς δὲ τὸν Ἀρειμάνιον.—Damascius,
quæstiones de primis principiis, ed. Kopp, 1826, cap. 125, p. 384.
235 De Sacy, Mémoire, p. 47; Lassen, Ind. Alt. i. 8.
236 Burnouf, Notes, 107. Spiegel, Beiträge zur Vergl. Sprachf. i. 131.
Anquetil had no authority for taking the Zend _airyaman_ for
Armenia.
237 Bochart shows (Phaleg, l. 1, c. 3, col. 20) that the Chaldee
paraphrast renders the Minî of Jeremiah by Har Minî, and as the same
country is called Minyas by Nicolaus Damascenus, he infers that the
first syllable is the Semitic Har, a mountain. (See Rawlinson’s
Glossary, s. v.)
238 Lassen, Ind. Alt. i. 8, note. _Arikh_ also is used in Armenian as
the name of the Medians, and has been referred by Jos. Müller to
Aryaka, as a name of Media. Journ. As. 1839, p. 298. If, as
Quatremère says, _ari_ and _anari_ are used in Armenian for Medians
and Persians, this can only be ascribed to a misunderstanding, and
must be a phrase of later date.
239 Sjögren, Ossetic Grammar, p. 396. Scylax and Apollodorus mention
Ἄριοι and Ἀριάνια, south of the Caucasus. Pictet, Origines, 67;
Scylax Perip. p. 213, ed. Klausen; Apollodori Biblioth. p. 433, ed.
Heyne.
240 Burnouf, Notes, p. 105.
241 Ptol. vi. 2, and vi. 14. There are Ἀναριάκαι on the frontiers of
Hyrcania. Strabo, xi. 7; Pliny, Hist. Nat. vi. 19.
242 On Arimaspi and Aramæi, see Burnouf, Notes, p. 105; Plin. vi. 9.
_ 243 Qairizam_ in the Zend-avesta, _Uvârazmis_ in the inscriptions of
Darius.
244 Stephanus Byzantinus.
245 Grimm, Rechts alterthümer, p. 292, traces Arii and Ariovistus back
to the Gothic _harji_, army. If this is right, this part of our
argument must be given up.
246 Pictet, Les Origines Indo-Européennes, p. 31. “_Iar_, l’ouest, ne
s’écrit jamais _er_ ou _eir_, et la forme _Iarin_ ne se rencontre
nulle part pour Erin.” Zeuss gives _iar-rend_, insula occidentalis.
But _rend_ (recte _rind_) makes _rendo_ in the gen. sing.
247 Old Norse _írar_, Irishmen, Anglo-Saxon _ira_, Irishman.
248 Though I state these views on the authority of M. Pictet, I think it
right to add the following note which an eminent Irish scholar has
had the kindness to send me:—“The ordinary name of Ireland, in the
oldest Irish MSS., is (_h_)_ériu_, gen. (_h_)_érenn_, dat.
(_h_)_érinn_. The initial _h_, is often omitted. Before
etymologizing on the word, we must try to fix its Old Celtic form.
Of the ancient names of Ireland which are found in Greek and Latin
writers, the only one which _hériu_ can formally represent is
_Hiberio_. The abl. sing. of this form—_Hiberione_—is found in the
Book of Armagh, a Latin MS. of the early part of the ninth century.
From the same MS. we also learn that a name of the Irish people was
_Hyberionaces_, which is obviously a derivative from the stem of
_Hiberio_. Now if we remember that the Old Irish scribes often
prefixed _h_ to words beginning with a vowel (_e.g._ _h-abunde_,
_h-arundo_, _h-erimus_, _h-ostium_), and that they also often wrote
_b_ for the _v_ consonant (_e.g._ _bobes_, _fribulas_, _corbus_,
_fabonius_); if, moreover, we observe that the Welsh and Breton
names for Ireland—_Ywerddon_, _Iverdon_—point to an Old Celtic name
beginning with _iver_—, we shall have little difficulty in giving
_Hiberio_ a correctly latinized form, viz. _Iverio_. This in Old
Celtic would be _Iveriu_, gen. _Iverionos_. So the Old Celtic form
of _Fronto_ was _Frontû_, as we see from the Gaulish inscription at
Vieux Poitiers. As _v_ when flanked by vowels is always lost in
Irish, _Iveriû_ would become _ieriu_, and then, the first two vowels
running together, _ériu_. As regards the double _n_ in the oblique
cases of _ériu_, the genitive _érenn_ (_e.g._) is to _Iverionos_ as
the Old Irish _anmann_ ‘names’ is to the Skr. _nâmâni_, Lat.
_nomina_. The doubling of the _n_ may perhaps be due to the Old
Celtic accent. What then is the etymology of _Iveriû_? I venture to
think that it may (like the Lat. _Aver-nus_, Gr. Ἄφορ-νος) be
connected with the Skr. _avara_, ‘posterior,’ ‘western.’ So the
Irish _des_, Welsh _deheu_, ‘right,’ ‘south,’ is the Skr.
_dakshina_, ‘dexter,’ and the Irish _áir_ (in _an-áir_), if it stand
for _páir_, ‘east,’ is the Skr. _pûrva_, ‘anterior.’
“M. Pictet regards Ptolemy’s Ἰουερνια (Ivernia) as coming nearest to
the Old Celtic form of the name in question. He further sees in the
first syllable what he calls the Irish _ibh_, ‘land,’ ‘tribe of
people,’ and he thinks that this _ibh_ may be connected not only
with the Vedic _ibha_, ‘family,’ but with the Old High German
_eiba_, ‘a district.’ But, first, according to the Irish phonetic
laws, _ibha_ would have appeared as _eb_ in Old, _eabh_ in
Modern-Irish. Secondly, the _ei_ in _eiba_ is a diphthong = Gothic
_ái_, Irish _ói_, _óe_, Skr. _ê_. Consequently _ibh_ and _ibha_
cannot be identified with _eiba_. Thirdly, there is no such word as
_ibh_ in the nom. sing., although it is to be found in O’Reilly’s
dictionary, along with his explanation of the intensive prefix
_er_—, as ‘noble,’ and many other blunders and forgeries. The form
_ibh_ is, no doubt, producible, but it is a very modern dative
plural of _úa_, ‘a descendant.’ Irish districts were often called by
the names of the occupying clans. These clans were often called
‘descendants (_huí_, _hí_, _í_) of such an one.’ Hence the blunder
of the Irish lexicographer.”—W. S.
249 See Rawlinson’s Glossary, s. v.
250 W. Ouseley, Orient. Geog. of Ebn. Haukal. Burnouf, Yasna, Notes, p.
102.
251 Ptol. vi. c. 17.
252 It has been supposed that _harôyûm_ in the Zend-avesta stands for
_haraêvem_, and that the nominative was not _Harôyu_, but _Haraêvô_.
(Oppert, Journal Asiatique, 1851, p. 280.) Without denying the
possibility of the correctness of this view, which is partially
supported by the accusative _vidôyum_, from _vidaêvo_, enemy of the
Divs, there is no reason why _Harôyûm_ should not be taken for a
regular accusative of _Harôyu_. This _Harôyu_ would be as natural
and regular a form as _Sarayu_ in Sanskrit, nay even more regular,
as _harôyu_ would presuppose a Sanskrit _sarasyu_ or _saroyu_, from
_saras_. M. Oppert identifies the people of _Haraiva_ with the
Ἀρεῖοι, but not, like Grimm, with the Ἄριοι.
253 It is derived from a root _sar_ or _sṛi_, to go, to run, from which
_saras_, water, _sarit_, river, and _Sarayu_, the proper name of the
river near Oude; and we may conclude with great probability that
this Sarayu or Sarasyu gave the name to the river Arius or Heri, and
to the county of Ἄρια or Herat. Anyhow Ἄρια, as the name of Herat,
has no connection with Ἄρια the wide country of the Âryas.
254 Diversions of Purley, p. 190.
255 AR might be traced back to the Sanskrit root, _ṛi_, to go (Pott,
Etymologische Forschungen, i. 218); but for our present purposes the
root, AR, is sufficient.
256 If, as has been supposed, the Cornish and Welsh words were
corruptions of the Latin _arâtrum_ they would have appeared as
_areuder_, _arawd_, respectively.
257 Grimm remarks justly that _airtha_ could not be derived from
_arjan_, on account of the difference in the vowels. But _airtha_ is
a much more ancient formation, and comes from the root _ar_, which
root, again, was originally _ṛi_ or _ir_ (Benfey, Kurze Gr., p. 27).
From this primitive root _ṛi_ or _ir_, we must derive both the
Sanskrit _irâ_ or _iḍâ_, and the Gothic _airtha_. The latter would
correspond to the Sanskrit _ṛita_. The true meaning of the Sanskrit
_iḍâ_ has never been discovered. The Brahmans explain it as prayer,
but this is not its original meaning.
258 Grimm derives _arbeit_, Gothic _arbaiths_, Old High-German
_arapeit_, Modern High-German _arbeit_, directly from the Gothic
_arbja_, heir; but admits a relationship between _arbja_ and the
root _arjan_, to plough. He identifies _arbja_ with the Slavonic,
_rab_, servant, slave, and _arbeit_ with _rabota_, _corvée_,
supposing that sons and heirs were the first natural slaves. He
supposes even a relationship between _rabota_ and the Latin _labor_.
German Dictionary, s. v. _Arbeit_.
259 Latin _remus_ (O. Irish _rám_) for _resmus_, connected with ἐρετμός.
From ἐρέτης, ἐρέσσω; and ὑπηρέτης, servant, helper. _Rostrum_ from
_rodere_.
260 Cf. Eur. Hec. 455, κώπη ἁλιήρης. Ἀμφήρης means having oars on both
sides.
261 From Sanskrit _plu_, πλέω; cf. fleet and float.
262 Other similes: ὕνις, and ὕννις, ploughshare, derived by Plutarch
from ὗς, boar. A plough is said to be called a pigsnose. The Latin
_porca_, a ploughed field, is derived from _porcus_, hog; and the
German _furicha_, furrow, is connected with _farah_, boar. The
Sanskrit _vṛika_, wolf, from _vraśch_, to tear, is used for plough,
Rv. i. 117, 21. _Godaraņa_, earth-tearer, is another word for plough
in Sanskrit. Gothic _hoha_, plough = Sk. _koka_, wolf. See Grimm,
Deutsche Sprache, and Kuhn, Indische Studien, vol. i. p. 321.
263 In the Vale of Blackmore, a waggon is called _plough_, or _plow_,
and _zull_ (A.-S. syl) is used for _aratrum_ (Barnes, Dorset
Dialect, p. 369).
264 Pott, Etymologische Forschungen, p. 267; Benfey, Griechisches
Wurzelwörterbuch, p. 236.
265 The Greek υποδρα, askance, is derived from ὑπὸ, and δρα, which is
connected with δέρκομαι, I see; the Sanskrit, dṛiś.
266 Generi coloniali, colonial goods. Marsh, p. 253. In Spanish,
generos, merchandise.
267 Many derivatives might have been added, such as _specimen_,
_spectator_, _le spectacle_, _specialité_, _spectrum_, _spectacles_,
_specious_, _specula_, &c.
268 Benloew, Aperçu Général, p. 28 _seq._
269 Benfey, Grammatik, § 147:—
Roots of the 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9 classes: 226
Roots of the 1, 4, 6, 10 classes: 1480
Total: 1706, including 143 of the 10th class.
270 Renan, Histoire des Langues sémitiques, p. 138. Benloew estimates
the necessary radicals of Gothic at 600, of modern German at 250, p.
22. Pott thinks that each language has about 1000 roots.
271 The exact number in the Imperial Dictionary of Khang-hi amounts to
42,718. About one-fourth part has become obsolete; and one-half of
the rest may be considered of rare occurrence, thus leaving only
about 15,000 words in actual use. “The exact number of the classical
characters is 42,718. Many of them are no longer in use in the
modern language, but they occur in the canonical and in the
classical books. They may be found sometimes in official documents,
when an attempt is made at imitating the old style. A considerable
portion of these are names of persons, places, mountains, rivers,
&c. In order to compete for the place of imperial historian, it was
necessary to know 9,000, which were collected in a separate
manual.”—_Stanislas Julien._
272 The study of the English language by A. D’Orsey, p. 15.
273 This is the number of words in the Vocabulary given by Bunsen, in
the first volume of his Egypt, pp. 453-491. Several of these words,
however, though identical in sound, must be separated
etymologically, and later researches have still further increased
the number. The number of hieroglyphic groups in Sharpe’s “Egyptian
Hieroglyphics,” 1861, amounts to 2030.
274 Marsh, Lectures, p. 182. M. Thommerel stated the number of words in
the Dictionaries of Robertson and Webster as 43,566. Todd’s edition
of Johnson, however, is said to contain 58,000 words, and the later
editions of Webster have reached the number of 70,000, counting the
participles of the present and perfect as independent vocables.
Flügel estimated the number of words in his own dictionary at
94,464, of which 65,085 are simple, 29,379 compound. This was in
1843; and he then expressed a hope that in his next edition the
number of words would far exceed 100,000. This is the number fixed
upon by Mr. Marsh as the minimum of the _copia vocabulorum_ in
English. See _Saturday Review_, Nov. 2, 1861.
275 Renan, Histoire, p. 138.
276 Endlicher, Chinesische Grammatik, § 128.
277 If two words are placed like _jin ta_, the first may form the
predicate of the second, the second being used as a substantive.
Thus _jin ta_ might mean the greatness of man, but in this case it
is more usual to say _jin tci ta_.
“Another instance, _chen_, virtue; Ex. jin tchi chen, the virtue of
man; _chen_, virtuous; Ex. chen jin, the virtuous man; _chen_, to
approve; Ex. chen tchi, to find it good; _chen_, well; Ex. chen ko,
to sing well.”—_Stanislas Julien._
278 Grimm, Deutsche Grammatik, b. ii. s. 521.
279 Each verb in Greek, if conjugated through all its voices, tenses,
moods, and persons, yields, together with its participles, about
1300 forms.
280 Histoire Générale et Système Comparé des Langues sémitiques, par
Ernest Renan. Seconde édition. Paris, 1858.
_ 281 Peshito_ means simple. The Old Testament was translated from
Hebrew, the New Testament from Greek, about 200, if not earlier.
Ephraem Syrus lived in the middle of the fourth century. During the
eighth and ninth centuries the Nestorians of Syria acted as the
instructors of the Arabs. Their literary and intellectual supremacy
began to fail in the tenth century. It was revived for a time by
Gregorius Barhebræus (Abulfaraj) in the thirteenth century. See
Renan, p. 257.
282 Messrs. Perkins and Stoddard, the latter the author of a grammar,
published in the Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. v.
1.
283 Renan, p. 214 _seq._, “Le chaldéen biblique serait un dialecte
araméen légèrement hébraisé.”
284 Arabic, _tarjam_, to explain; _Dragoman_, Arabic, _tarjamân_.
285 The most ancient are those of Onkelos and Jonathan, in the second
century after Christ. Others are much later, later even than the
Talmud. Renan, p. 220.
286 Renan, pp. 220-222.
_ 287 Talmud_ (instruction) consists of _Mishna_ and _Gemara_. _Mishna_
means repetition, viz. of the Law. It was collected and written down
about 218, by Jehuda. _Gemara_ is a continuation and commentary of
the Mishna; that of Jerusalem was finished towards the end of the
fourth, that of Babylon towards the end of the fifth, century.
288 First printed in the Rabbinic Bible, Venice, 1525.
289 Quatremère, Mémoire sur les Nabatéens, p. 139.
290 Renan, p. 241.
291 Ibid. p. 237.
292 Quatremère, Mémoire sur les Nabatéens, p. 116.
293 Ibn-Wahshiyyah was a Mussulman, but his family had been converted
for three generations only. He translated a collection of Nabatean
books. Three have been preserved, 1, the Nabatean Agriculture; 2,
the book on poisons; 3, the book of Tenkelusha (Teucros) the
Babylonian; besides fragments of the book of the secrets of the Sun
and Moon. The Nabatean Agriculture was referred by Quatremère
(Journal Asiatique, 1835) to the period between Belesis who
delivered the Babylonians from their Median masters, and the taking
of Babylon by Cyrus. Prof. Chwolson, of St. Petersburg, who has
examined all the MSS., places Kuthami at the beginning of the
thirteenth ceatury B. C.
294 Renan, Mémoire sur l’âge du livre intitulé Agriculture Nabatéenne,
p. 38. Paris, 1860.
295 See Letter on Turanian Languages, p. 62.
296 Renan, Histoire des Langues sémitiques, p. 137.
297 Pococke, Notes to Abulfaragius, p. 153; Glossology, p. 352.
298 Endlicher, Chinesische Grammatik, p. 223.
299 Endlicher, Chinesische Grammatik, p. 339.
300 “In this word _tse_ (tseu) does not signify son; it is an addition
of frequent occurrence after nouns, adjectives, and verbs. Thus,
_lao_, old, + _tseu_ is father; _neï_, the interior, + _tseu_ is
wife; _hiang_, scent, + _tseu_ is clove; _hoa_, to beg, + _tseu_, a
mendicant; _hi_, to act, + _tseu_, an actor.”—_Stanislas Julien_.
301 Letter on the Turanian Languages, p. 24.
302 Survey of Languages, p. 90.
303 The Abbé Molina states that the language of Chili is entirely free
from irregular forms. Du Ponceau, Mémoire, p. 90.
304 Letter on Turanian Languages, p. 206.
305 Of these I can only give a tabular survey at the end of these
Lectures, referring for further particulars to my “Letter on the
Turanian Languages.” The Gangetic and Lohitic dialects are those
comprehended under the name of Bhotîya.
306 Professor Boller of Vienna, who has given a most accurate analysis
of the Turanian languages in the “Transactions of the Vienna
Academy,” has lately established the Turanian character of Japanese.
307 Letter on the Turanian Languages, p. 75.
308 M. Stanislas Julien remarks that the numerous compounds which occur
in Chinese prove the wide-spread influence of the principle of
agglutination in that language. The fact is, that in Chinese every
sound has numerous meanings; and in order to avoid ambiguity, one
word is frequently followed by another which agrees with it in that
particular meaning which is intended by the speaker. Thus:—
_chi-youen_ (beginning-origin) signifies beginning.
_ken-youen_ (root-origin) signifies beginning.
_youen-chi_n (origin-beginning) signifies beginning.
_meï-miai_ (beautiful-remarkable) signifies beautiful.
_meï-li_ (beautiful-elegant) signifies beautiful.
_chen-youen_ (charming-lovely) signifies beautiful.
_yong-i_ (easy-facile) signifies easily.
_tsong-yong_ (to obey, easy) signifies easily.
In order to express “to boast,” the Chinese say _king-koua_,
_king-fu_, &c., both words having one and the same meaning.
This peculiar system of _juxta-position_, however, cannot be
considered as agglutination in the strict sense of the word.
309 Turanian Languages, p. 24.
310 These “Outlines” form vols. iii. and iv. of Bunsen’s work,
“Christianity and Mankind,” in seven vols. (London, 1854: Longman),
and are sold separately.
311 Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen, 1855, p. 298.
312 Ibid., p. 302, note.
313 “Here the lines converge as they recede into the geological ages,
and point to conclusions which, upon Darwin’s theory, are
inevitable, but hardly welcome. The very first step backward makes
the negro and the Hottentot our blood-relations; not that reason or
Scripture objects to that, though pride may.” Asa Gray, “Natural
Selection not inconsistent with Natural Theology,” 1861, p. 5.
“One good effect is already manifest, its enabling the advocates of
the hypothesis of a multiplicity of human species to perceive the
double insecurity of their ground. When the races of men are
admitted to be of one species, the corollary, that they are of one
origin, may be expected to follow. Those who allow them to be of one
species must admit an actual diversification into strongly marked
and persistent varieties; while those, on the other hand, who
recognize several or numerous human species, will hardly be able to
maintain that such species were primordial and supernatural in the
ordinary sense of the word.” Asa Gray, Nat. Sel. p. 54.