Comparative Philology furnishes us with admirable guidance--so far as it goes. But we do not wish to stop at the terminus which it seems to consider a satisfactory one. The final answer it offers us, we do not regard as final. We gladly accept the analysis of Language down to its Roots. But we wish to analyze Roots also. That the Moon derives its name from being regarded as the _Measurer_ of time; and Man, from the notion of _thinking_; that an (_anh_) is a widely-diffused root, signifying _pressure_; and that _ga_ denotes _going_; with similar expositions, is valuable information, and takes us a great way toward the goal of our seeking. But the question of questions relating to Language is not answered by it. Why should the abstract idea of measuring be expressed by _ma_; and that of thinking by _man_? How did _an_ come to signify pressure; and _ga_, going? Is there any special relationship between these roots and the ideas which they respectively indicate? Or was it by chance merely that they were adopted in connection with each other? Might _da_ just as meet have been taken to denote doing, and _kar_, giving, as _vice versa_? Has the root _an_ any distinguishing characteristics peculiarly fitting it to suggest _choking_ or _pressure_? Or might that notion have been equally well expressed by _stha_? It is at this fundamental stage of the investigation, whence a true _Science_ of Language must take its departure, that the labors and disclosures of Comparative Philology cease; leaving the problem of the Origin of Language involved in the same state of unintelligibility with which it has always been surrounded. It is just at this point, however, that the SCIENTIFIC UNIVERSAL LANGUAGE previously noticed begins its developments. By means of its assistance we may hope, therefore, to arrive at a satisfactory solution of the problem in question, and, through this solution, at a clear understanding of the more specific objects of our present inquiry. Before approaching this main object--the exposition of the general character of the NEW SCIENTIFIC UNIVERSAL LANGUAGE and its relations to existing Tongues--and still in aid of that purpose, I must offer some further comments upon the excerpts already made from 'The Science of Language;' and upon a few other points which remain to be extracted from that work.