662 GEOGRAPHY 



a national color, and, absurd as it may seem to scientific reflection, 

 national or linguistic feeling is sometimes a bar to their general 

 adoption. A more serious difficulty is that different languages favor 

 different modes of thought, and thus lead to different methods of 

 classification. The clearness and definiteness of French conduces 

 to the use of simple names, and the recognition of definite features 

 distinguished by clear differences. The facility for constructing 

 compound words presented by German lends itself to the recognition 

 of composite types and transition forms, the introduction of which 

 often tangles a classification in an almost unmanageable complexity. 

 English stands intermediate between those languages, less precise, 

 perhaps, than French, certainly less adaptable than German, and 

 English terminologies often reflect this character. The best way out 

 of the difficulty seems to be to endeavor to arrive at a general under- 

 standing as to a few broad types of land-form which are recognized 

 by every one as separate and fundamental, and then to settle equi- 

 valent terms in each important language by an international com- 

 mittee, the finding of which would have to be ratified by the national 

 geographical societies. These terms need not necessarily be identical, 

 nor even translated literally from one language into another, but 

 their equivalence as descriptive of the same form should be absolute. 

 A recent international committee appointed for the nomenclature 

 of the forms of sub-oceanic relief put forward certain suggestions in 

 this direction which might well be adapted to the forms of sub-aerial 

 relief as well. But there are strong-willed geographers who will 

 recognize no authority as binding, and who will not, I fear, ever con- 

 form to any scheme which might threaten their liberty to call things 

 as they please. 



Personally, I would go very far to obtain uniformity and agree- 

 ment on essential points, but the only way to do so seems to be to 

 arrive by general agreement at a classification that is as brief, simple, 

 and essential as possible. 



It is necessary to classify land-forms according to their resem- 

 blances and differences, so that similar forms may be readily de- 

 scribed, wherever they may be. The fixed forms of the crust are the 

 foundation of all geography, the ultimate condition underlying every 

 distribution, the guiding or controlling resistance in every strict!}' 

 geographical change. The question of place-names is altogether 

 subordinate. It is convenient that every place should have a name, 

 and desirable that the name should be philologically good, but the 

 national boards of geographic names, geographical societies, and 

 survey departments see to that, and do their work well. The ques- 

 tion of terminology is far more difficult, and, I think, more pressing. 



The grand problem of geography I take to be the demonstration 

 and quantitative proof of the control exercised by the forms of the 



