240 ON A DOMINANT LANGUAGE FOR SCIENCE. 



Iccvls.* In German, tbe construction of sentences indicating generic or 

 other characters is sometimes so obscure that I have found it impossi- 

 ble, in certain cases, to have them put into Latin by a German, a good 

 botanist, who was better acquainted than myself with both languages. 

 It would be still worse if authors had not introduced many words purely 

 Latin into their language. But, exclusive of paragraphs relative to 

 characters, and wherever successive phenomena or theories are in ques- 

 tion, the superiority of modern languages is unquestionable. It is on 

 this account that, even in natural history, Latin is every day less em- 

 I)loyed. 



The loss, however, of the link formerly established between scientific 

 men of all countries has made itself felt. From this has arisen a very 

 chimerical i^roposal to form some artificial language which should be 

 to all nations what writing is to the Chinese. It was to be based on 

 Ideas — not words. The problem has remained quite devoid of solution ; 

 and even were it possible, it would be so complicated an aftair — so im- 

 practicable and inflexible — that it would quickly drop into disuse. 



The wants and the circumstances of each epoch have brought about 

 a preference for one or other of the principal European languages as a 

 means of communication between enlightened men of all countries. 

 French rendered this service during two centuries. At i)resent various 

 causes have modified the use of this language in other countries, and 

 the habit has been almost everywhere introduced that each nation 

 shonid employ its own tongue. We have, therefore, entered ui)ou a 

 IDcriod of confusion. What is thought to be new in one country is not 

 so to those who read books in other languages. It is vain to study liv- 

 ing languages more and more; you are always behindhand in the com- 

 plete knowledge of what is being published in other countries. Few 

 persons are acquainted with more than two languages ; and if we try 

 to i)ass beyond a certain limit iu this respect, we rob ourselves of time 

 for other things ; for there is a point at which the study of the means 

 of knowledge hinders our learning. Polyglot discussions and conver- 

 sations do not answer the intentions of those who attempt them. I a:n 

 persuaded that the inconvenience of such a state of things will be more 

 and more felt. I also believe, judging by the example of Greek as used 

 by the Eomans and French in modern times, that the need of a pre- 

 vailing language is almost always recognized ; it is returned to from 

 necessity after each period of anarchy. To understand this we must 

 consider the causes which make a language preferable, and those which 

 spread its employment in spite of any defects it may possess. 



Thus, in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, motives existed for 

 the employment of French in preference to Latin throughout Europe. 

 It was a language spoken by the greater i^art of the educated men of 



* The word glabcr, in botany, means bald or not hairy, which is applied to other parts 

 as well as the head ; and Icevis, smooth, not rough ; but I know they have both been care- 

 lessly translated "smooth," as M. de Candolle implies. — J. E. G. 



