dogma, has pleaded the necessity of admitting more than one
beginning for the human race and for language in an article in the
Journal of the German Oriental Society, ix. 405, “Max Müller und die
Kennzeichen der Sprachverwandtschaft,” 1855; in a treatise “Die
Ungleichheit menschlicher Rassen,” 1856; and in the new edition of
his “Etymologische Forschungen,” 1861.
315 Dugald Stewart, vol. iii. p. 35.
316 Herder, as quoted by Steinthal, “Ursprung der Sprache,” s. 39.
317 “In all these paths of research, when we travel far backwards the
aspect of the earlier portions becomes very different from that of
the advanced part on which we now stand; but in all cases the path
is lost in obscurity as it is traced backwards towards its starting
point:—it becomes not only invisible, but unimaginable; it is not
only an interruption, but an abyss, which interposes itself between
us and any intelligible beginning of things.” Whewell, Indications,
p. 166.
318 “Der Mensch ist nur Mensch durch Sprache; um aber die Sprache zu
erfinden, müsste er schon Mensch sein.”—_W. von Humboldt, Sämmtliche
Werke_, b. iii. s. 252. The same argument is ridden to death by
Süssmilch, “Versuch eines Beweises dass die erste Sprache ihrem
Ursprung nicht vom Menschen, sondern allein vom Schöpfer erhalten
habe.” Berlin, 1766.
319 Farrar, Origin of Language, p. 10; Grimm, Ursprung der Sprache, s.
32. The word βεκός, which these children are reported to have
uttered, and which, in the Phrygian language, meant bread, thus
proving, it was supposed, that the Phrygian was the primitive
language of mankind, is derived from the same root which exists in
the English, to bake. How these unfortunate children came by the
idea of baked bread, involving the ideas of corn, mill, oven, fire,
&c., seems never to have struck the ancient sages of Egypt.
320 “L’usage de la main, la marche à deux pieds, la ressemblance,
quoique grossière, de la face, tous les actes qui peuvent résulter
de cette conformité d’organisation, ont fait donner au singe le nom
d’_homme sauvage_, par des homines à la vérité qui l’étaient à demi,
et qui ne savaient comparer que les rapports extérieurs. Que
serait-ce, si, par une combinaison de nature aussi possible que
toute autre, le singe eût eu la voix du perroquet, et, comme lui, la
faculté de la parole? Le singe parlant eût rendu muette d’étonnement
l’espèce humaine entière, et l’aurait séduite au point que le
philosophe aurait eu grand’peine à démontrer qu’avec tous ces beaux
attributs humains le singe n’en était pas moins une bête. Il est
donc heureux, pour notre intelligence, que la nature ait séparé et
placé, dans deux espèces très-différentes, l’imitation de la parole
et celle de nos gestes.”—_Buffon_, as quoted by Flourens, p. 77.
321 Odyssey, xvii. 300.
322 “The evident marks of reasoning in the other animals,—of reasoning
which I cannot but think as unquestionable as the instincts that
mingle with it.”—_Brown, Works_, vol. i. p. 446.
323 Flourens, De la Raison, p. 51.
324 To allow that “brutes have certain mental endowments in common with
men,” ... “desires, affections, memory, simple imagination, or the
power of reproducing the sensible past in mental pictures, and even
judgment of the simple or intuition kind;”—that “they compare and
judge,” (Mem. Amer. Acad. 8, p. 118,)—is to concede that the
intellect of brutes really acts, so far as we know, like human
intellect, as far as it goes; for the philosophical logicians tell
us that all reasoning is reducible to a series of simple judgments.
And Aristotle declares that even reminiscence,—which is, we suppose,
“reproducing the sensible past in mental pictures,”—is a sort of
reasoning (τὶ ἀναμιμνήσκεσθαί ἐστι οἱον συλλογισμός τισ.) Asa Gray,
Natural Selection, &c., p. 58, _note_.
325 Conscience, Boek der Natuer, vi., quoted by Marsh, p. 32.
326 Book ii. chapter xi. § 10.
327 I regret to find that the expressions here used have given offence
to several of my reviewers. They were used because the names
Onomatopoetic and Interjectional are awkward and not very clear.
They were not intended to be disrespectful to those who hold the one
or the other theory, some of them scholars for whose achievements in
comparative philology I entertain the most sincere respect.
328 A fuller account of the views of Herder and other philosophers on
the origin of language may be found in Steinthal’s useful little
work, “Der Ursprung der Sprache:” Berlin, 1853.
329 Farrar, p. 74.
330 Pott, Etymologische Forschungen, i. 87; Zeitschrift, iii. 43.
_ 331 Kârava_, explained in Sanskrit by _ku-rava_, having a bad voice, is
supposed to be a mere dialectical corruption of _krava_ or _karva_.
Κορώνη presupposes κορων = κοροον = _h_(_a_)_raban_. The Sanskrit
_kârava_ may, however, be derived from _kâru_, singer; but in that
case _kâru_ must not be derived from _kṛi_.
332 See Pictet, Aryas Primitifs, p. 381.
333 In Chinese the number of imitative sounds is very considerable. They
are mostly written phonetically, and followed by the determinative
sign “mouth.” We give a few, together with the corresponding sounds
in Mandshu. The difference between the two will show how differently
the same sounds strike different ears, and how differently they are
rendered into articulate language:—
The cock crows kiao kiao in Chinese, dchor dchor in Mandshu.
The wild goose cries kao kao in Chinese, kôr kor in Mandshu.
The wind and rain sound siao siao in Chinese, chor chor in Mandshu.
Waggons sound lin lin in Chinese, koungour koungour in Mandshu.
Dogs coupled together sound ling-ling in Chinese, kalang kalang in
Mandshu.
Chains coupled together sound tsiang-tsiang in Chinese, kiling
kiling in Mandshu.
Bells coupled together sound tsiang-tsiang in Chinese, tang tang in
Mandshu.
Drums coupled together sound ḱan ḱan in Chinese, tung tung in
Mandshu.
334 Ὁ γὰρ Ἐπίκουρος ἔλεγεν, ὅτι οὑχὶ ἐπιστημόνως οὖτοι ἔθεντο τὰ
ὀνόματα, ἀλλὰ φυσικῶς κινούμενοι, ὡς οἱ βήσσοντες καὶ πταίροντες καὶ
μυκώμενοι καὶ ὐλακτοῦντες καὶ στενάζοντες.—Lersch,
Sprach-philosophie der Alten, i. 40. The statement is taken from
Proclus, and I doubt whether he represented Epicurus rightly.
335 Diversions of Purley, p. 32.
336 The following list of Chinese interjections may be of interest:—
hu, to express surprise.
fu, the same.
tsai, to express admiration and approbation.
i, to express distress.
tsie, vocative particle.
tsie tsie, exhortative particle.
ài, to express contempt.
ŭ-hu, to express pain.
shin-ĭ, ah, indeed.
pŭ sin, alas!
ngo, stop!
In many cases interjections were originally words, just as the
French _hélas_ is derived from _lassus_, tired, miserable. Diez,
Lexicon Etymologicum, s. v. _lasso_.
337 Sir W. Hamilton’s Lectures, ii. p. 319.
338 Nouveaux Essais, lib. iii. c. i. p. 297 (Erdmann); Sir W. Hamilton,
Lectures, ii. 324.
339 Pott, Etymologische Forschungen, p. 324, _seq._
340 Benfey, Griech. Wurzel Lex. p. 611. From _sku_ or _ku_, σκῦτος,
skin; _cŭtis_, _haut_.
341 Sir William Hamilton (Lectures on Metaphysics, ii. p. 327) holds a
view intermediate between those of Adam Smith and Leibniz. “As our
knowledge,” he says, “proceeds from the confused to the distinct,
from the vague to the determinate, so, in the mouths of children,
language at first expresses neither the precisely general nor the
determinately individual, but the vague and confused, and out of
this the universal is elaborated by generification, the particular
and singular by specification and individualisation.” Some further
remarks on this point in the Literary Gazette, 1861, p. 173.
342 “We receive the impression of the falling of a large mass of water,
descending always from the same height and with the same difficulty.
The scattering of the drops of water, the formation of froth, the
sound of the fall by the roaring and by the froth, are constantly
produced by the same causes, and, consequently, are always the same.
The impression which all this produces on us is no doubt at first
felt as multiform, but it soon forms a whole, or, in other terms, we
feel all the diversity of the isolated impressions as the work of a
great physical activity which results from the particular nature of
the spot. We may, perhaps, till we are better informed, call all
that is fixed in the phenomenon, _the thoughts of
nature_.”—_Oersted, Esprit dans la Nature_, p. 152.
343 “Ce qui trompe l’homme, c’est qu’il voit faire aux bêtes plusieurs
des choses qu’il fait, et qu’il ne voit pas que, dans ces choses-là
même, les bêtes ne mettent qu’une intelligence grossière, bornée, et
qu’il met, lui, une intelligence _doublée d’esprit_.”—_Flourens, De
la Raison_, p. 73.
344 See Heyse, System der Sprachwissenschaft, s. 97.
345 The word _quinsy_, as was pointed out to me, offers a striking
illustration of the ravages produced by phonetic decay. The root
_anh_ has here completely vanished. But it was there originally, for
_quinsy_ is the Greek κυνάγχη, dog-throttling. See Richardson’s
Dictionary, s. v. quinancy.
346 Greek χαμαί, Zend _zem_, Lithuanian _zeme_, and _źmenes_, _homines_.
See Bopp, Glossarium Sanscritum, s. v.
347 See Windischmann, Fortschritt der Sprachenkunde, p. 23.
348 Farrar, Origin of Language, p. 85.
349 Θήσω τὰ μὲν φύσει λεγόμενα ποιεῖσθαι θείᾳ τέχνη.
350 This view was propounded many years ago by Professor Heyse in the
lectures which he gave at Berlin, and which have been very carefully
published since his death by one of his pupils, Dr. Steinthal. The
fact that wood, metals, cords, &c., if struck, vibrate and ring,
can, of course, be used as an illustration only, and not as an
explanation. The faculty peculiar to man, in his primitive state, by
which every impression from without received its vocal expression
from within, must be accepted as an ultimate fact. That faculty must
have existed in man, because its effects continue to exist.
Analogies from the inanimate world, however, are useful, and deserve
farther examination.
351 Dr. Murray’s primitive roots were, ag, bag, dwag, cwag, lag, mag,
nag, rag, swag.
352 Curtius, Griechische Etymologie, p. 13. Dr. Schmidt derives all
Greek words from the root _e_, and all Latin words from the
arch-radical _hi_.
353 Endlicher, Chinesische Grammatik, p. 163.
354 System der Sprachwissenschaft, p. 16.
355 See Schleicher, Deutsche Sprache, p. 144.
356 Marsh, p. 388.