按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
more and more refuted by facts； and more and more going out of fashion with
philologians； and partly also because the traces of onomatopea in separate
words become almost obliterated in the course of ages。 The poet of
language cannot put in and pull out letters； as a painter might insert or
blot out a shade of colour to give effect to his picture。 It would be
ridiculous for him to alter any received form of a word in order to render
it more expressive of the sense。 He can only select； perhaps out of some
dialect； the form which is already best adapted to his purpose。 The true
onomatopea is not a creative； but a formative principle； which in the later
stage of the history of language ceases to act upon individual words； but
still works through the collocation of them in the sentence or paragraph；
and the adaptation of every word； syllable； letter to one another and to
the rhythm of the whole passage。
iv。 Next； under a distinct head； although not separable from the
preceding； may be considered the differentiation of languages； i。e。 the
manner in which differences of meaning and form have arisen in them。 Into
their first creation we have ceased to enquire： it is their aftergrowth
with which we are now concerned。 How did the roots or substantial portions
of words become modified or inflected？ and how did they receive separate
meanings？ First we remark that words are attracted by the sounds and
senses of other words； so that they form groups of nouns and verbs
analogous in sound and sense to one another； each noun or verb putting
forth inflexions； generally of two or three patterns； and with exceptions。
We do not say that we know how sense became first allied to sound； but we
have no difficulty in ascertaining how the sounds and meanings of words
were in time parted off or differentiated。 （1） The chief causes which
regulate the variations of sound are （a） double or differing analogies；
which lead sometimes to one form； sometimes to another （b） euphony； by
which is meant chiefly the greater pleasure to the ear and the greater
facility to the organs of speech which is given by a new formation or
pronunciation of a word （c） the necessity of finding new expressions for
new classes or processes of things。 We are told that changes of sound take
place by innumerable gradations until a whole tribe or community or society
find themselves acquiescing in a new pronunciation or use of language。 Yet
no one observes the change； or is at all aware that in the course of a
lifetime he and his contemporaries have appreciably varied their intonation
or use of words。 On the other hand； the necessities of language seem to
require that the intermediate sounds or meanings of words should quickly
become fixed or set and not continue in a state of transition。 The process
of settling down is aided by the organs of speech and by the use of writing
and printing。 （2） The meaning of words varies because ideas vary or the
number of things which is included under them or with which they are
associated is increased。 A single word is thus made to do duty for many
more things than were formerly expressed by it； and it parts into different
senses when the classes of things or ideas which are represented by it are
themselves different and distinct。 A figurative use of a word may easily
pass into a new sense： a new meaning caught up by association may become
more important than all the rest。 The good or neutral sense of a word；
such as Jesuit； Puritan； Methodist； Heretic； has been often converted into
a bad one by the malevolence of party spirit。 Double forms suggest
different meanings and are often used to express them； and the form or
accent of a word has been not unfrequently altered when there is a
difference of meaning。 The difference of gender in nouns is utilized for
the same reason。 New meanings of words push themselves into the vacant
spaces of language and retire when they are no longer needed。 Language
equally abhors vacancy and superfluity。 But the remedial measures by which
both are eliminated are not due to any conscious action of the human mind；
nor is the force exerted by them constraining or necessary。
（7） We have shown that language； although subject to laws； is far from
being of an exact and uniform nature。 We may now speak briefly of the
faults of language。 They may be compared to the faults of Geology； in
which different strata cross one another or meet at an angle； or mix with
one another either by slow transitions or by violent convulsions； leaving
many lacunae which can be no longer filled up； and often becoming so
complex that no true explanation of them can be given。 So in language
there are the cross influences of meaning and sound； of logic and grammar；
of differing analogies； of words and the inflexions of words； which often
come into conflict with each other。 The grammarian； if he were to form new
words； would make them all of the same pattern according to what he
conceives to be the rule； that is； the more common usage of language。 The
subtlety of nature goes far beyond art； and it is complicated by
irregularity； so that often we can hardly say that there is a right or
wrong in the formation of words。 For almost any formation which is not at
variance with the first principles of language is possible and may be
defended。
The imperfection of language is really due to the formation and correlation
of words by accident； that is to say； by principles which are unknown to
us。 Hence we see why Plato； like ourselves unable to comprehend the whole
of language； was constrained to 'supplement the poor creature imitation by
another poor creature convention。' But the poor creature convention in the
end proves too much for all the rest： for we do not ask what is the origin
of words or whether they are formed according to a correct analogy； but
what is the usage of them； and we are compelled to admit with Hermogenes in
Plato and with Horace that usage is the ruling principle； 'quem penes
arbitrium est； et jus et norma loquendi。'
（8） There are two ways in which a language may attain permanence or fixity。
First； it may have been embodied in poems or hymns or laws； which may be
repeated for hundreds； perhaps for thousands of years with a religious
accuracy； so that to the priests or rhapsodists of a nation the whole or
the greater part of a language is literally preserved； secondly； it may be
written down and in a written form distributed more or less widely among
the whole nation。 In either case the language which is familiarly spoken
may have grown up wholly or in a great measure independently of them。 （1）
The first of these processes has been sometimes attended by the result that
the sound of the words has been carefully preserved and that the meaning of
them has either perished wholly； or is only doubtfully recovered by the
efforts of modern philology。 The verses have been repeated as a chant or
part of a ritual； but