On poetic interpretation of natureShairp, John Campbell
Philosophy
On poetic interpretation of nature
Shairp, John Campbell
Nature in literature; Poetry -- History and criticism
This whole subject has been so well handled and so amply illustrated
by Professor Max Müller in the Second Series of his Lectures on “the
Science of Language,” and in Archbishop Trench’s instructive and
delightful volumes on “Words,” that I can but refer to these works and
make here a few excerpts from them as examples of the general principle
of thought to which I have adverted. Locke, as Professor Müller shows,
long ago asserted that in all languages “names which stand for things
which fall not under our senses have had their first rise from sensible
ideas.”
Our word “spirit” comes from the Latin _spiritus_, the breath, and
_spiro_, to breathe; so _animus_, the soul, a seat of the affections, and
_anima_, the living principle, are connected with the Greek ἄνεμος, wind.
Indeed, _anima_ is sometimes used in Latin for a breeze, as readers of
Horace will remember, and all are connected with the Greek verb ἄω, to
blow. πνεῦμα, the Greek word used in Scripture to express spirit and a
spiritual being, originally means wind and breath, from the verb πνέω, to
blow and to breathe. Again, ψυχή, life and soul, is connected with ψύχω,
which in Homer means to breathe, to blow. So that in all these cases we
see that men, when they first became aware of an invisible and spiritual
principle within themselves, named it by an act of imagination from the
most impalpable entity their senses perceived,—the wind, or the breath.
Again, take our word “ideal.” It comes from the Greek ἰδέα, from ἰδεῖν,
to see, originally a word of sight, expressing the look or appearance
of a thing, which Plato in time employed to express the most spiritual
entities, the supersensible pattern of all created things. Again, our
words “imagination” and “imaginative,” how have they been formed? The
Latin word _imaginatio_ occurs but rarely; more frequently the verb
_imaginor_, to picture to one’s self; more frequent still is _imago_,
as if _imitago_, from _imitor_, to imitate. This last is connected with
the Greek verb μιμέομαι, meaning also to imitate; and the original of
these, and all the cognate words, both Latin and Greek, is the Sanscrit
root _mâ_, to measure. So from this very palpable process of measuring
the land, there have been spun all the subtle and delicate words that
express the working of imagination. So the mental processes expressed by
“apprehend,” “comprehend,” and “conceive,” are all derived from bodily
processes, and mean respectively to grasp at a thing with the hand,
to grasp a thing together, to take and hold together. Again, the word
“perceive,” from the Latin _percipere_, was in the language of husbandry
used for the farmer gathering in the fruits of his fields and storing
them in his garner. Was then the mind conceived of as a husbandman who
gathers in the notices of sense from the outer world, and stores them in
an invisible garner? To “inculcate:” here is another mental word borrowed
from husbandry. It means to tread or stamp firmly in with the heel, and
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account