THE EVOLUTION OF LANGUAGE. ioi 



independent organism ; besides, the sounds or vocal emissions do not 

 become a language till they acquire significance by means of an opera- 

 tion that escapes us. It is easy to answer to this that, while language 

 is in relation with a mental operation, it nevertheless constitutes a fact 

 which is perceived by a sense the sense of hearing. Of course, it is 

 only in the abstract sense that we can regard language as an organ- 

 ism, but there is no doubt that in reality it behaves like an organism, 

 and that it is in a constant state of evolution. And it is to this con- 

 dition of evolution that I invite attention. 



The phases of this evolution, as we understand it, are those of 

 formation, growth, maturity, and decay. The variation is continual. 

 Languages arise, are developed, pass on to decadence, and perish, like 

 other organized beings. That their historical development is modi- 

 fied in the course of ages, according to certain conditions, is incon- 

 testable ; but the observer of these modifications never sees in them 

 anything other than phenomena of natural evolution. The evident 

 proof of this fact is that the evolution is, as a whole, the same in lin- 

 guistic families essentially different from one another. 



Abel Remusat has, in his "Recherches sur les langues tartares," 

 indicated the general nature of the evolution of idioms : " In studying 

 them attentively," he says, "we are tempted to believe that they are 

 as constant in their march as the physical constitution that gives origin 

 to them. . . . Possibly there prevails in languages less of the arbitrary 

 than we have been accustomed to suppose ; and, if we bring to their 

 study the necessary care, we may be able to find in them signs as sure, 

 as pronounced, and as characteristic as 'those which we can deduce 

 from physiognomy, the color of the skin, or any other physical and 

 external peculiarity." This "necessary care" has been carried into 

 the study of languages, and we shall see to what conclusions it has 

 led us. 



We are not acquainted with any language in its embryonic condi- 

 tion, if such a term is admissible. All of the languages submitted to 

 our direct observation, even those of the most primitive stage, have 

 passed the period of formation, which was prehistoric, and are now in 

 the historical period, and generally in their decay. But by methodi- 

 cally separating and comparing their formative elements we can put 

 ourselves, as it were, into the period of their formation. 



The result of such comparative researches has confirmed the the- 

 ory proposed in 1818 by William Schlegel, that languages first passed 

 through a monosyllabic period ; that some of them rose to the stage 

 of development called the agglutinative ; and that a small number of 

 these last reach a later stage of flexion. The structure of the lan- 

 guages of the first class is simple, that of the second class is complex, 

 and that of the third class is still more complex. 



In the first phase of language, the root and the word are one, and 

 each word-root or root-word is monosyllabic. The phrase is therefore 



