The plurality of the human racePouchet, G. (Georges)
Philosophy
The plurality of the human race
Pouchet, G. (Georges)
Monogenism and polygenism
II. The study of languages is connected, on the one hand, to the
physiology of the human race, but more immediately still to the study
of the varieties of the human mind, of which they are in some measure
the organ. They can by this means assist also in classifying mankind
into natural groups. But where the study of languages affects more
especially the anthropologist,[202] is when it touches on the origin
of the varieties of language, and of the primitive state (either
intellectual or social) of the speaking man: when it endeavours
to fathom the past each day farther back,--each day nearer to the
_origin_. Thus bound together, the two sciences ought to have the same
destiny; philology has had its monogenists and its polygenists. The
first have been obliged to give way, overpowered by the number and
the superiority of their opponents. They are done for; and the field
remains free to the latter, who affirm, through their studies, the
multiplied origin of human language, leaving the consequences to be
deduced, or deducing them themselves.[203]
One sole declaration will suffice us, that of the history of Semitic
idioms. “If the planets, whose physical nature seems to be analogous
to that of the earth,” says M. Renan,[204] “are peopled with beings
organised like ourselves, we may presume that the history and the
language of those planets does not differ more from our own than
does the history and language of the Chinese.” It is impossible to
establish by a clearer and more striking image the individuality of the
different families of language, not one of which owes its origin to
its neighbours, and which have, probably, never been in one another’s
presence, except when they had already been formed, bringing with them
their own characteristics, their fundamental and profound type, as
unalterable by contact as is the physical type of the men who spoke
them. These, in presence of others, may have been able to alter their
traditions, their remembrances, their words, but these were never more
than simple _loans_; we may be certain that these men were strangers
one to the other on the day when they uttered their first words in
their cradles.
We must limit ourselves merely to recording the result, which is, that
each system of language is absolutely irreducible to others, both by
its basis and its form; all born in human thought, it is true, but this
thought following at each point a particular path, so that each of
these systems, as M. Renan has said, only abuts on the others by the
community of the aim it is intended to reach.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account