صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني
[graphic]

PRINCIPAL WORDS.

COMMENT.

WORD.

STEM.

do not find either Sanskrit, Persian, Greek or Latin from
fero. Puer and máis (? Æol. Tóp) comes therefore under
the same remark as we have made upon parens: we do
not entirely understand them; all that we know is, that
there is every certainty of parens and frater belonging to
very different roots; unless parens in Old Latin were
farens, which we have hitherto never seen asserted. At

any rate we protest against puer-n. Whence came the n?
Schwester ; Got. swistar ; Fränk. suestar. The The roots are the same, but only consist in either language
st in the middle was changed into r, as in

of s-r=s-s: the t has nothing to do with them, nor was st honor, honos, honestus.

ever changed into r; s was very often.

Soror.

Rex.

Reg.

Laws, &c.
Goth. reiki, recke ; Old Prus. reikis, from re- Rer connects itself no doubt with ópegw, rectus ; Anglo-Saxon,

gen, richten—to make straight, to lead ; reccian, &c.; with the English word rich; Spanish, rico,
hence in many compounded words, Theodo- wealthy, powerful, (a Gothic word,) as seen in their ricos
ricus, Fähn-rich, &c. &c.

hombres, i. e. nobles; with Gothic, ragineis, a councillor,

and many other such words. The original conception
Reich ; Swed. riki ; Dan. rign.

seems to be extension. Should not the Gothic word ruler
be reikeis, not reiki ; and the word regnum, Gothic, reiki,
Anglo-Saxon rice. Our verb and noun reign are derived
from the Latin through the French, and were no doubt
the easier adopted from their resemblance to our own

Anglo-Saxon forms.
Sinistans was the Burgundian and Visigothic Doubts have been thrown upon the derivation of senatus
name for high-priests and old men, from

from senex, but we think that this passage removes them. sineigo, senex ; also among the Alem. according to Amm. Marcel. Seniscallus was the oldest and first of the Servants.

[graphic]
[blocks in formation]

Lex.

Leg.

In Swedish and Gothic, laws are named Lagen,

formed from Legen, to lay foundations, as
Gesetz in German, from Setzen ; Anglo-
Saxon, Lah, Laga ; Isl. Lag, Laug, Log ;
Dan. Low ; Eng. Law. Many would derive
it from legere, lesen (to read); but partly
this very

word in its first meaning was legen,
and partly people had laws long before they
could read.

Lucumones. Lucomon.

Among the Tuscans, and in Mantua, men of

dignity, the presidents of the Curiæ. In Anglo-Saxon Lahman, Lawgiver. According to Verel, Lagman, Lagmadur, Governor of a Province; so Denelage, Law of the Danes.

Curia.

Curj. .

.

Pers. Chargah ; Teut. place of meeting, Church. The derivation of Old High Dutch kyrihha and Anglo-Saxon

In Kero, Chirichu; Danish, Kirke; Swed. cyrice, from cëósan, ceás, coren, is right; it thus immedi-
Kyrka, probably from Kören, an out-chosen

ately represents the Greek Enxancia, the called or chosen

portion.
society. In Rome, the place of meeting of
the dignitaries ; in Germany, of the religious
community

We have thus given, together with our own comments, a portion (a small one only) of Professor Jäkel's work. If in general we appear to differ widely from him, it must be borne in mind that we have generally selected as the object of our comment the word which appeared to need correction as stated by him: his examples, in this part of his work, extend from page 36 to 126; and after having thus given the resemblances in form between the Latin and German languages, and always, whether right or wrong, asserted the derivation of the Latin from the German, he proceeds to the second part of his argument, viz. the similarity of their inflections and conjugations. Upon the first of these we wish to bestow a few words, because we think that Jäkel has adopted a dangerous heresy, which bis authority will help to spread. It was early observed that in Danish and Swedish the article was in certain cases appended to the word; that this occurred when a definite sense was to be given to it, and that then the noun assumed a very different appearance from its plain indefinite form. The Professor, therefore, assumes that this occurred in Gothic and Latin also, and that the whole of the theory of declension depends upon this addition of the article—a conclusion eminently false. He first gives the three following paradigms of the definite article:

Gothic.
Singular.

Plural.
þata

pos

bo þis bizor bis

þize

þizo þamma þizai þamma þaim þaim

baim þana. þo.

þata.
þans. þos.

po.
Old High Dutch.
þar
þie

þie

þie
þes
þero

bero
þemo
beni

þemu

þem
þeu.
bie.

pena. and pretexting that the substantive declensions would be too long in examining, gives only the paradigm of the Gothic adjective as a convincing proof of the origin of the inflection, viz. the final addition of the definite article. Singular.

Plural.
N. Blind-s Blind-a S Blind-ata Blind-ai Blind-os Blind-a

Blind
G. Blind-is Blind-aizos Blind-is Blind-aize Blind-aizo Blind-aize
D, Blind-amma Blind-ai Blind-amma Blind-aim Blind-aim Blind-aim
A. Blind-ana Blind-a 5 Blind-ata Blind-ans Blind-os Blind-a.

| Blind. Then asserting that the same thing occurs in Greek by the mere addition of ős, ő, ő, the true articulus postpositivus (äp Spor ÚROTAT

* In Gothic s generally becomes : (not ts) in the middle of words.

Neut.

Mas.

Fem.

Net.

Mas.
Sa

Fem.
So

þai

þize

Mas. Sing.

Old Saxon.

Mas. Plur.

Mas. Plur.

Mas. Sing.

þes

pie.

[ocr errors]

σόμενον), he instances the nouns αετ-ός, τιμή, ρόδ-ον and άλλ-ο. We might object to the relative ós, and not the usual é, ý, có being made to correspond with sa, so, pata; but as he does his best to confound them, we suspect he was desirous of getting rid of this distinction: he therefore assumes that after a time the Greeks forgot that they had already appended one article to their noun, and so found it necessary to use a second; and supposes that the same thing might take place in German. This he illustrates at some length in modern German, and proceeds to apply his theory to the Latin, which he supposes to have had us, is, a, um for its article. So pisc-is, reg-s (rex), dent-s (dens), nomens (nomen), &c. &c., fruct-us, veh-a (via). It may also at times be er, when it is is not the contracted wair, vir.*

To this principle generally we object on two grounds: first, because it leaves the question just where it stood before; for if the adjective and noun have only their inflections by the addition of the relative pronoun, the forms of the pronoun itself equally require to be accounted for; because, in short, the origin of the -amma in the dat. s. of the adjective, and the dat. sing. of the pronoun or article, is equally obscure; and because the general form must have been common to both: we therefore say, not that blind-amma was so formed because the pronoun was þumma, but that both blind-amma and þ-amma were so formed because -amma was in Gothic the form of the dative case. Neither Professor Jäkel, nor we, can tell why it was so; nor can we tell a bit more why cel signified to be over: just as little do we kuow why the oak had not the leaves of the tea tree, or the Teuton the thick lips and woolly hair of the Æthiopian: how the life in the man, the sap in the tree, and the principle of language in the tongue have developed themselves into their existing form, we know not.

Our second objection is equally fatal; it is connected with the last, and runs thus; that in order to make out

the derivation of the declension from the pronoun, he keeps what ** is the sign of case of both, and throws away

of both, and throws away the pronoun itself, the , which contains its root: had he found blind-bamma, &c. it would have strengthened his case, but blind-bamma he never did, nor could find: the case of the Greek appears to make more strongly for him, because the os is apparently without a

* We hope we have got rid of this wair=er, which we are sorry to see the Professor that adopt. It is never to be forgotten that throwing away consonants can only be resorted

to when there is no other possible method of explanation, and then only when a comparison of the same word in other languages warrants it: we cannot doubt that n has been left out in Anglo-Saxon sidh, journey, because we have Goth. sinþs; nor in AngloSaxon sódh because Old Nor. sannr, Anglo-Saxon gós because Old High Dutch kans, Lat. anser, Sansk. hams-a, cycnus. ? Does not this loss of a consonant always lengthen the vowel ? VOL. X. NO, XX.

FF

consonant; but we beg to restore the important aspirate, to read the word ós, Hos, and to ask if in the added syllable of inflection, which he asserts to consist of this only, he finds the working of this breathing, this letter H7--He does not.

In considering the forms of the Greek and Latin verb, i.e. the personal forms and such of the tenses as are formed by an additional syllable, he makes use of the personal verb of being, in the same way as he before made use of the pronoun. To this we answer as we did before: “ Whence came the forms of the personal verb itself?" It is evident that the same secret law which determined them determined the forms of other verbs also. We shall not take to pieces, bit by bit, the various verbs of being which contribute in all these languages to make up the one in use, but content ourselves with the observation, that generally in this method of addition the root is thrown away, and the form only remaining, this (which would have equally been the form of the verb under examination) is called, for the system's sake, the substantive verb.

The portion of his work which embraces from page 156 to 231, is a historical inquiry into the peoples that made up the Latin nation, and a philological investigation of their names. This lies without our province, and in general we avoid such canvassing of names, because we never feel that we have sure footing at first. We will not, therefore, prejudge our author here, but leave him to better scholars, and those who are more deeply versed in the history of the world's migrations.

And with this we take leave both of the Professor and our readers: we do not profess much originality in what we have addressed to them, but we hope and believe that a good deal of it is new to Englishmen, and that it will thus be neither uninteresting nor unprofitable to them. Above all, we know that what we have laid down is true: of our own etymological comments the learned in these matters may judge: of the correctness of the principles on which our comments rest we cannot admit a doubt; we have tried them long and carefully. And here a word or two to young etymologists must not be omitted: we warn them against theorizing too soon; it is a delightful occupation, and one to which the constitution of the mind leads us of necessity; but at one time it is ruinous, while later employed it leads to great and useful conclusions. Generalization implies a previous knowledge of individual cases, and we therefore implore such as seriously incline to these studies, and who feel within themselves that they may thus profitably lay out their talents for the advantage of themselves and of the world, to walk with caution, and to doubt well; to rest in hope of seeing at some future time

« السابقةمتابعة »