The Chautauquan, Vol. 05, October 1884, No. 1Chautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle
Science
The Chautauquan, Vol. 05, October 1884, No. 1
Chautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle
Chautauqua Institution -- Periodicals; Chautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle -- Periodicals
The tracing of the growth of words which has been scientifically—that
is, historically and logically—prosecuted for a little more than fifty
years, has brought to light the important fact—a fact the discovery of
which is second in importance only to that of the discovery of the law
of gravitation—that all the languages of the civilized peoples of Europe
and America, together with some in Asia, have a common origin. At one
time there was no English, no French, no German, no Russian language, no
Erse or Gælic, no Latin, no Greek; but at that time the germ of all these
languages, and of others which need not be mentioned, existed in a tongue
which for more than four thousand years has been unspoken, but which from
the people who spoke it has been called Aryan (pronounced _Ahrian_).
This discovery was sure to have been made in one way or another; but the
immediate cause of it was the presence in Hindostan of the British East
India Company. In 1776, N. B. Halhed, a servant of that company, who had
been an early friend of Sheridan, the orator and dramatist, published a
Bengali grammar, in which he mentions as very remarkable, “the similitude
of Sanskrit words with those of Persian and Arabic (?), and even of Latin
and Greek; and these not in technical and metaphorical terms, which the
mutation of refined arts and improved manners might have occasionally
introduced, but in the main groundwork of the language, in monosyllables,
in the names of numbers, and the appellations of such things as would be
first discriminated on the first dawn of civilization.” Soon afterward,
in 1786, Sir William Jones, who had gone to Bengal as a judge, in a paper
in “Asiatic Researches,” expressed a like opinion more strongly and in
more comprehensive terms. “The Sanskrit language,” he says, “whatever
may be its antiquity is of a wonderful structure, more perfect than
the Greek, more copious than the Latin, and more exquisitely refined
than either, yet bearing to both of them a stronger affinity, both in
the roots of verbs and in the forms of grammar[B] than could have been
produced by accident, so strong that no philologer could examine all the
three without believing them to have sprung from one common source, which
perhaps no longer exists. There is a similar reason, though not quite
so forcible, for supposing that both the Gothic and the Celtic, though
blended with a different idiom, had the same origin with the Sanskrit.
The old Persian may be added to the same family.”
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