adopting the different parts of a Verb and Noun, under the name's of Voices-Moods-Tenses, &c. Cases, &c., in forming Derivatives— Compounds, &c. If the Reader will cast his eyes for a moment over such words as Ago, Duco, Traho, in Latin, and Ayw, Baλλw, in Greek, &c. &c., with their various acknowledged Derivatives-Compounds, &c., he will be astonished to see, what a prodigious variety of ideas, apparently and in fact, most remote from each other, has been engrafted upon the same stock, or has proceeded from the same fundamental notion. The dissimilitude of ideas, existing in terms related to each other, must be considered as one of the most familiar effects produced by such a process; as we know, that in the artifice of Verbs the most prominent effect is that of producing a sense or an idea, directly opposite, with the same term, as Vinc-ere, Vinc-i, Conquer, Conquer-ed, &c. &c.

These acknowledged and familiar operations of Language will shew us, that the mind would pursue the same course, as far as it is able, on other occasions, by endeavouring to produce a Race of different Words, passing into each other, under the same fundamental idea; though their forms may be so different, that with our present conceptions on Language, their Affinity may be concealed from our view. The mind, I say, as we may conceive, from what we manifestly perceive, will endeavour to effect a similar purpose in a similar way; and the Cognate Consonants, as we have seen, are capable of being employed in effecting this purpose, and are likewise able to maintain their position in recording the fact of its existence. Other causes, however, may have operated, which would place such a barrier to the propensity of the mind, and the properties of the organs, that no System of extent or importance could be formed on this fact, however ascertained and apparent it might be. Languages might have been so constituted, as to bear little or no affinity with each other; and in such a case each form of Speech might have had a System, peculiar to itself. There is another circumstance likewise of the highest importance in such a question, and this relates to the nature of the impressions, which have influenced the mind in the formation of ideas and of words. If it should have happened, that Languages

owe

owe their existence to impressions, arising from a variety of objects; the words, of which it is formed, might be considered as divided into as great a variety of Sets and Classes, which it would be difficult perhaps or impossible to arrange. In this case the propensity of the mind to pursue one fundamental idea, through a wide sphere of meaning, or to form one continued chain of ideas, by links mutually connected with each other, would be counteracted by another propensity, which consists in obeying the influence of predominating impressions, however various and discordant they may be. Under such an operation, Language might have presented to our view a state so embroiled and entangled, that no efforts of sagacity or diligence would have succeeded in attempting to unravel the difficulties, with which it was involved. If it should have happened, that some one great and important object has seized upon the mind, and has supplied Language with its ideas and its words; we shall at once understand, how favourable such a fact would be in the establishment of a System. If, moreover, it should have happened, from some cause connected with the History of the Human Race, that Languages bear the most intimate relation and affinity to each other, our hopes of forming some general System will be highly excited and enlarged. From the co-operation of both these causes every thing might be expected, and we should then be induced to believe, that the sphere of our labours would become bounded-distinct, and defined. Our researches would then appear to be employed on the study of one great Language-universally diffused under various forms; which was itself originally derived from one great object, universally apparent, and perpetually soliciting the attention of mankind. We must proceed however with care and caution in the developement of such facts, if such are to be found; and we must commence our enquiries with any the most simple and acknowledged cases, before we venture to advance to conclusions, so extensive and important.

The Vowels, as we have seen, are wholly banished from my System, in the representation of words, not only as unnecessary, but as impeding likewise to the purposes of the Etymologist; and the Consonants alone are retained, as being those parts, which are best

able

able to propagate and to record a train of ideas, under some common, fundamental notion. Let us examine by an appeal to acknowledged and familiar facts existing in Language, if any attempts have been ever made to record ideas by Consonants only, and how far this process has actually been carried. The Reader, who perhaps on the commencement of these enquiries might have been alarmed at the hypothesis, that Vowels were unnecessary to the Art of the Etymologist, will be astonished to learn or to recollect, that they are not even necessary to convey ideas in the familiar representation of Languages, and that there are forms of Speech, and those too the most ancient and illustrious of their order, in which the Vowels are rejected. In the Eastern Languages Consonants only are applied, and the Vowels are either partly or wholly banished from the representation of Words. In my early meditations on this subject I had already proceeded to the conclusion, respecting the inutility of Vowels, and the importance of Consonants, before I recollected this familiar fact, so important to my purpose. It is marvellous to observe, how slowly the mind recalls to its view the most known and acknowledged truths, for the purpose of combining them with a new train of ideas; and perhaps, as I have suggested, the Reader himself may have proceeded to this point of the enquiry, under the same influence, without the smallest recollection of so familiar a fact.

When I began to engage in the study of the Eastern Languages, a new scene was opened to my view, and all my former conceptions became enlarged and confirmed. Before we proceed further in unfolding the train of ideas, connected with the study of these Languages; it is necessary to explain the precise mode, in which they have applied the Consonants, and rejected the Vowels. In the alphabet of these Eastern Languages-Hebrew, Arabic, &c. certain Vowels indeed exist, but they are of little importance in discharging regularly and familiarly those offices, which the Vowels in our own Language, and in others of a similar kind perpetually perform. The Reader will not understand, that the Hebrews and Arabs, &c. have acquired any artifice unknown to Europeans, by which they are enabled to speak their Language without Vowels: He will readily perceive, that this

neglect

neglect of Vowels must refer only to the writing of Language; and we shall find no great difficulty in comprehending, that the symbols employed to denote the Vowel breathings are not absolutely necessary in the representation of a Language. Perhaps the following example will best serve to illustrate the mode, in which words are written in the Eastern Languages, with that mixture of Consonants and Vowels, which exists in their alphabet. "Ur fther whch art in avn hlwd "be th nm: th kngdm cm, th wl be dn in arth, as it is in avn: gv-s ths dy ur dly brd, and frgv-s ur trspss, as w-forgy thm tht trsps agnst-s, and ld-s nt int tempttn bt dlvr-s frm avl: fr thn is th-kngdm and th-pwr and th-glry fr avr and avr.” This speci

men will give the Reader a very sufficient notion of the mode, in which Vowels are used and neglected in the Arabic and Hebrew Languages.

Though this is the ordinary manner, in which the Hebrews and Arabs write their Language; yet they likewise employ certain marks (which, as adopted in Hebrew, are called points,) above and below the words, to represent the Vowels, which have been omitted, and which are necessary in the enunciation. Vowels, we know, are equally necessary with Consonants in speaking a Language; and if we would become intelligible, we must adopt the same Vowels in expressing the same idea: but in writing a Language, I may venture to affirm, they are in many cases totally useless. Those, who well understand a Language, do not attach to a word, as Father, &c. the sounds which ought to be adopted, by a nice consideration of the force belonging to the peculiar symbols a and e, but by an immediate impression of the sense, which the whole symbol conveys to the mind. It is evident therefore, that if the symbol, as FтHR, be sufficient to excite in the understanding the exact idea, which was meant to be expressed; any attempt to represent the breathing is superfluous. Now we know, that in the Eastern Languages the Consonants are of themselves sufficient to excite this idea; and if the Reader will make the experiment on some English sentences, with which he is not conversant, written without Vowels, he will discover, that even in his first attempts to understand their meaning he has but few difficulties

to

to encounter; and he will be perfectly convinced, that with a small portion of practice no embarrassment whatever would arise from that

cause.

It will instantly be seen, that the Lexicons, in explaining the various senses of a single word, as it might be called, represented without Vowels, would often exhibit a variety of senses, which on the first view might appear but little similar or related to each other: Still, however, I observed, that the Hebrew Lexicographers considered it as an important part of their task, to discover the general idea, to which these various senses might be all referred; and to detail with precision the links of the chain, by which their affinity was ascertained and preserved. I observed, that the same word, as the Hebrew Lexicographers would call it, in assuming these various senses, often adopted different points or Vowels; that is, according to our mode of conceiving the subject, we should say, that different words existed with different meanings, and that the same Consonants were to be found in all. We here perceive, that the presence of the same Consonants in these several words, which, in Hebrew, is thought of most importance in the question, would, according to our conceptions, be totally disregarded; or, if at all noticed, would be considered only as the effect of accident.

t

In contemplating this circumstance, a new scene of investigation was opened to my view. I began to reflect, that, as Man was the same creature in the East and in the West, the English Language must have arisen from the same principles of mind and organs, however modified by circumstances, which operated in the formation of the Hebrew; and that similar facts, as they are connected with these causes, would probably be found in both these Languages. It was then easy to understand, that, if the Hebrew Lexicographers had formed a true conception of their subject; a Dictionary might be written in English on the same plan, and that the same mode of investigation might likewise be adopted. I then applied for confirmation of this idea to an example in English: I examined the various senses belonging to the Word or the Radical CP, and I found, that with different points or vowels, it signified A Species of Dress—A Vessel

h