564 On CrysiallographiJ. 



feuch as titanium, uranium, &c. The ideas which they 

 present are so far from carrying us to the objects which they 

 serve to designate, that they can neither occasion mistake 

 nor contusion; so ihat they are in the same situation as 

 if they were purely imaginary. Sometunes also persons 

 ascribe to a natural production ihe name of the person who 

 discovered it ; but it would be rather too severe to condemn 

 entirely this way of paying a kind of homage for a favour 

 Conferred on science. 



It appears to me that there is more advantage in em- 

 ploying significant words, which recall some cliaracteristic 

 property of the mineral to be denommaied, or some cir- 

 cumstance relative to its history. But because this mineral 

 is frequently distinguished from others only by its general 

 characters, we ought not to require tliat the name, which can 

 bear upon a single character only, should make the object it 

 ^lesignates apparent without ambiguity. Moreover, if we 

 consider that the characters of minerals are susceptible « f 

 variation, we must admit that the nomenclator mav here 

 allow himself considerable latitude, and it is sufficient that 

 each word should rest -on. some idea connected with a 

 knowledge of the object. Without this latitude, it would 

 be almost impossible to make significant, i. e. reasonable, 

 names. In a subject so fraught with difficulty, every thing 

 is admissible, except what is inexcusable. 



Now it must be confessed that the French language is 

 not well adapted to furnish significant words without the 

 help of periphrases, which exceed the narrow bounds 

 within which true .names ought to be confined. Let 

 this language display in the descriptions of objects the 

 clearness and precision which characterize it; but let 

 the specific names be furnished by the Greek, which 

 has the eminent advantage of moulding several words 

 into one, so as to paint in miniature the object which 

 it serves to denominate. fn this way a multitude of 

 words have been formed which are used in the arts and 

 sciences. Every day ihese words are multiplied ; the in- 

 strument which transmits ideas to a distance in the twink- 

 ling of an eye, is the telegraph; the art of writing written 

 words with rapidity is called stenograp/ii/, &c. Wherefore 

 then should we banish the Greek language from the coun- 

 try of the sciences, where it has been so long naturalized, 

 and where every new expression introduced by necessity, 

 finds itself as it were in the same family with a thousand 

 others which preceded it ? 



It is frona the same source that I have derived the names 



which 



