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！
le without speech； consequently as speech is confined to the human race； there is a gulf which cannot be bridged between man and all other creatures。 （Some interesting comments on the theory will be found in a lecture on 〃Thought and Language〃 in Samuel Butler's 〃Essays on Life； Art and Science〃； London； 1908。） On the title…page of his 〃Science of Thought〃 he put the two sentences 〃No Reason without Language： No Language without Reason。〃 It may be readily admitted that the second dictum is true； that no language properly so… called can exist without reason。 Various birds can learn to repeat words or sentences used by their masters or mistresses。 In most cases probably the birds do not attach their proper meaning to the words they have learnt； they repeat them in season and out of season； sometimes apparently for their own amusement； generally in the expectation； raised by past experience； of being rewarded for their proficiency。 But even here it is difficult to prove a universal negative； and most possessors of such pets would repudiate indignantly the statement that the bird did not understand what was said to it； and would also contend that in many cases the words which it used were employed in their ordinary meaning。 The first dictum seems to be inconsistent with fact。 The case of deaf mutes； such as Laura Bridgeman； who became well educated； or the still more extraordinary case of Helen Keller； deaf； dumb； and blind； who in spite of these disadvantages has learnt not only to reason but to reason better than the average of persons possessed of all their senses； goes to show that language and reason are not necessarily always in combination。 Reason is but the conscious adaptation of means to ends； and so defined is a faculty which cannot be denied to many of the lower animals。 In these days when so many books on Animal Intelligence are issued from the press； it seems unnecessary to labour the point。 Yet none of these animals； except by parrot…imitation； makes use of speech； because man alone possesses in a sufficient degree of development the centres of nervous energy which are required for the working of articulation in speech。 On this subject much investigation was carried on during the last years of Darwin's life and much more in the period since his death。 As early as 1861 Broca； following up observations made by earlier French writers； located the centre of articulate speech in the third left frontal convolution of the brain。 In 1876 he more definitely fixed the organ of speech in 〃the posterior two… fifths of the third frontal convolution〃 （Macnamara； 〃Human Speech〃； page 197； London； 1908。）； both sides and not merely the left being concerned in speech production。 Owing however to the greater use by most human beings of the right side of the body； the left side of the brain； which is the motor centre for the right side of the body； is more highly developed than its right side； which moves the left side of the body。 The investigations of Professors Ferrier； Sherrington and Grunbaum have still more precisely defined the relations between brain areas and certain groups of muscles。 One form of aphasia is the result of injury to or disease in the third frontal convolution because the motor centre is no longer equal to the task of setting the necessary muscles in motion。 In the brain of idiots who are unable to speak； the centre for speech is not developed。 （Op。 cit。 page 226。） In the anthropoid apes the brain is similarly defective； though it has been demonstrated by Professors Cunningham and Marchand 〃that there is a tendency； especially in the gorilla's brain； for the third frontal convolution to assume the human form。。。But if they possessed a centre for speech； those parts of the hemispheres of their brains which form the mechanism by which intelligence is elaborated are so ill…developed； as compared with the rest of their bodies； that we can not conceive； even with more perfect frontal convolutions； that these animals could formulate ideas expressible in intelligent speech。〃 （Op。 cit。 page 223。）
While Max Muller's theory is Shelley's
〃He gave man speech； and speech created thought； Which is the measure of the universe〃 （〃Prometheus Unbound〃 II。 4。）；
it seems more probable that the development was just the oppositethat the development of new activities originated new thoughts which required new symbols to express them； symbols which may at first have been； even to a greater extent than with some of the lower races at present； sign language as much as articulation。 When once the faculty of articulation was developed； which； though we cannot trace the process； was probably a very gradual growth； there is no reason to suppose that words developed in any other way then they do at present。 An erroneous notion of the development of language has become widely spread through the adoption of the metaphorical term 〃roots〃 for the irreducible elements of human speech。 Men never talked in roots； they talked in words。 Many words of kindred meaning have a part in common； and a root is nothing but that common part stripped of all additions。 In some cases it is obvious that one word is derived from another by the addition of a fresh element； in other cases it is impossible to say which of two kindred words is the more primitive。 A root is merely a convenient term for an abstraction。 The simplest word may be called a root； but it is nevertheless a word。 How are new words added to a language in the present day？ Some communities； like the Germans； prefer to construct new words for new ideas out of the old material existing in the language； others； like the English； prefer to go to the ancient languages of Greece and Rome for terms to express new ideas。 The same chemical element is described in the two languages as sour stuff （Sauerstoff） and as oxygen。 Both terms mean the same thing etymologically as well as in fact。 On behalf of the German method； it may be contended that the new idea is more closely attached to already existing ideas； by being expressed in elements of the language which are intelligible even to the meanest capacity。 For the English practice it may be argued that； if we coin a new word which means one thing； and one thing only； the idea which it expresses is more clearly defined than if it were expressed in popularly intelligible elements like 〃sour stuff。〃 If the etymological value of words were always present in the minds of their users； 〃oxygen〃 would undoubtedly have an advantage over 〃sour stuff〃 as a technical term。 But the tendency in language is to put two words of this kind which express but one idea under a single accent； and when this has taken place； no one but the student of language any longer observes what the elements really mean。 When the ordinary man talks of a 〃blackbird〃 it is certainly not present to his consciousness that he is talking of a black bird； unless for some reason conversation has been dwelling upon the colour rather than other characteristics of the species。
But； it may be said； words like 〃oxygen〃 are introduced by learned men； and do not represent the action of the man in the street； who； after all； is the author of most additions to the stock of human language。 We may go back therefore some four centuries to a period； when scientific study was only in its infancy； and see what process was followed。 With the discovery of America new products never seen before reached Europe； and these required names。 Three of the most characteristic were tobacco； the potato； and the turkey。 How did these come to be so named？ The first people to import these products into Europe were naturally the Spanish discoverers。 The first of these wordstobaccoappears in forms which differ only slightly in the languages of all civilised countries： Spanish tabaco； Italian tabacco； French tabac； Dutch and German tabak； Swedish tobak； etc。 The word in the native dialect of Hayti is said to have been tabaco； but to have meant not the plant （According to William Barclay； 〃Nepenthes； or the Virtue of Tobacco〃； Edinburgh； 1614； 〃the countrey which God hath honoured and blessed with this happie and holy herbe doth call it in their native language 'Petum'。〃） but the pipe in which it was smoked。 It thus illustrates a frequent feature of borrowingthat the word is not borrowed in its proper signification； but in some sense closely allied thereto； which a foreigner； understanding the language with difficulty； might readily mistake for the real meaning。 Thus the Hindu practice of burning a wife upon the funeral pyre of her husband is called in English 〃suttee〃； this word being in fact but the phonetic spelling of the Sanskrit 〃sati〃； 〃a virtuous woman；〃 and passing into its English meaning because formerly the practice of self…immolation by a wife was regarded as the highest virtue。
The name of the potato exhibits greater variety。 The English name was borrowed from the Spanish 〃patata〃； which was itself borrowed from a native word for the 〃yam〃 in the dialect of Hayti。 The potato appeared early in Italy； for the mariners of Genoa actively followed the footsteps of their countryman Columbus in exploring America。 In Italian generally the form 〃patata〃 has survived。 The tubers；