stream, the rolling of the thunder, the barking of a dog, the groans
of the wounded, the only result would have been infinite variations
of clamour quite impossible to distinguish or to understand. Strictly
speaking, the prolonged sound of “_bée_” and “_mou_” might awaken the
conception of a goat and cow in the mind; but in order to convey the
idea of a herd of oxen it would be necessary to avoid equally the sound
of “_bée_” and “_mou_,” as belonging exclusively to the two special
animals. The warbling notes of birds have always attracted attention,
and essays have been made to reproduce them by imitative harmony,
but the various peoples have given various interpretations,[2] and
in the generality of cases there is no resemblance between the names
of animals and their cries.[3] After examining the testimony of the
name “cuckoo” (no doubt convincing taken by itself), which is the
prominent argument brought forward by the advocates of the imitative
theory called by Max Müller the bow-wow theory, we are not able to
advance further in that direction. Darwin in his book, _The Descent
of Man_, promulgates the idea that language may have originated from
interjections and imitations, but elsewhere in the _Expressions of
the Emotions_ he hastens to add with his accustomed frankness: “But
the whole subject of the differences of the sounds produced under
different states of the mind is so obscure that I have succeeded in
throwing hardly any light on it; and the remarks which I have made have
but little significance.”[4]
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