This leads to some observation respecting the-- § 92. _Introduction of new words and Hybridism._--Hybridism is a term derived from _hybrid-a_, _a mongrel_; a Latin word _of Greek extraction_. The terminations -ize (as in _criticize_), -ism (as in _criticism_), -ic (as in _comic_)--these, amongst many others, are Greek terminations. To add them to words not of Greek origin is to be guilty of hybridism. Hence, _witticism_ is objectionable. The terminations -ble (as in _penetrable_), -bility (as in _penetrability_), -al (as in _parental_)--these, amongst many others, are Latin terminations. To add them to words not of Latin origin is to be guilty of hybridism. Hybridism is the commonest fault that accompanies the introduction of new words. The hybrid additions to the English language are most numerous in works on science. It must not, however, be concealed that several well established words are hybrid; and that, even in the writings of the classical Roman authors, there is hybridism between the Latin and the Greek. Nevertheless, the etymological view of every word of foreign origin is, not that it is put together in England, but that it is brought whole from the language to which it is vernacular. Now no derived word can be brought whole from a language unless, in that language, all its parts exist. The word _penetrability_ is not derived from the English word _penetrable_, by the addition of -ty. It is the Latin word _penetrabilitas_ imported. _In derived words all the parts must belong to one and the same language_, or, changing the expression, _every derived word must have a possible form in the language from which it is taken_. Such is the rule against hybridism. § 93. A true word sometimes takes the appearance of a hybrid without really being so. The -icle, in _icicle_, is apparently the same as the -icle in _radicle_. Now, as _ice_ is Gothic, and -icle classical, hybridism is simulated. _Icicle_, however, is not a derivative but a compound; its parts being _is_ and _gicel_, both Anglo-Saxon words.[39] § 94. _On incompletion of the radical._--Let there be in a given language a series of roots ending in -t, as _sæmat_. Let a euphonic influence eject the -t, as often as the word occurs in the nominative case. Let the nominative case be erroneously considered to represent the root, or radical, of the word. Let a derivative word be formed accordingly, i.e., on the notion that the nominative form and the radical form coincide. Such a derivative will exhibit only a part of the root; in other words, the radical will be incomplete. Now all this is what actually takes place in words like _hæmo-ptysis_ (_spitting of blood_), _sema-phore_ (_a sort of telegraph_). The Greek imparisyllabics eject a part of the root in the nominative case; the radical forms being _hæmat-_ and _sæmat-_, not _hæm-_and _sæm-_.