158 



THE OSPREV. 



two types, and there was no name for the new 

 class (or concept) as there was for all his others. 

 A name, therefore, had to be devised. It was 

 ;inother happy insi)iration that led I.inna'us to 

 name tlie ohiss iiuDii nnilia . Tliose who arr 

 familiar with tlu- works and ratiocination, and 

 especially the nomenclature, of the great Swede 

 may divine his thoughts and share with him in 

 the execution of his ideas, although he did not 

 g"ive etymologies. 



The name in question was evidetitly made in 

 analogy with aniiiialia. In Hnimalia. the prin- 

 cipal component was aiiiiiia. the vital principle 

 or animal life;"' the singular was animal. In 

 mammalia, the essential component was )iiaiiii)ia, 

 breast: the singular should be mammal. The 

 terminal element ( — al) was coincident with 

 rather than derived from the Latin suffix ( — alls) 

 which expressed the idea of resemblance or rela- 

 tionship; an^'way, it wa.s used in substantive on general natural history and not find it. 



tionaries of those languages- not even in the 

 great dictionary of lyittre.f 



Of course the (xermans coined a word from 

 their vern:icnlar Saug"ethiere or Suckling ani- 

 mals: the cognate nations imitated; the Dutch 

 with Zoogdieren. the Swedish with Diiggdjuren, 

 and tlie Danes and Norwegians with Pattedyrene. 



Condensing the data thus obtained into dic- 

 tionary form we might have some such expla- 

 nations as the following: 



M.\MMAi. [< ML. )iiaiii)iia/ia.\ One of the 

 mammalia g. r. 



Mammalia, ;/.//. |NL,. (modelled aft'='r L. aii- 

 ima/ia, Linnaeus, 17.S8;) < L. )}iaiiiiiia, breast -f- 

 pl. sutfix — alia. The sing'ular (rarely used) is 

 mammal, neut. 1 



The singular form — mammal — has been indi- 

 cated as rare or unusual. One might look 

 through many volumes on mammals as well as 



form, and the idea of possession or inclusion 

 was involved, as in the case of animal, capital, 

 feminal, tribunal — all well known Latin words. 

 In tine, a mammal is a being especially marked 

 by, or notable for having, mamma^. 



The truth embodied in the word was almost 

 immediately appreciated, and the class of mam- 

 mals has been adopted ever since the Linnaean 

 period by zoologists. Nattirally the new Latin 

 name was to some extent i^eplaced by a name in 

 the vernacular tongues of most nations. 



In the accommodating English alone the Latin 

 word was adopted with only a change in its end- 

 ing-, and thus the class name iiiaiiiiiials was in- 

 troduced, and the sin.gular invnx -)iiai>iinal — 

 followed as a matter of course, and bv chance 

 (or rather the genius of language) exactly coin- 

 cided in Joriii with the singular of the Latin 

 word. 



Not only had the name nothing to do with the 

 alleged derivative Latin words. It was not ad- 

 mitted at all into the vernacular speech of France, 

 Spain, Portugal or Italy. The naturalists and 

 lexicog'raphers of those countries failed even 

 to appreciate its etymological aptness and 

 beauty. First, the French had to introduce a 

 new word to correspond — mamniiferes or the 

 breast-bearers. The other Latin races followed; 

 the Spanish and the Portuguese with mamiferos, 

 and the Italians with mammiferi. Mammifers 

 was even attempted to be introduced into 

 English, but happily without success. None of 

 the words quoted in the Century Dictionary are 

 even given as nouns in the ordinary die- 



As a matter of fact, however, it ma^- be fre- 

 quently used. Let us g^o, for example, into a lab- ■ 

 oratory when they are assorting- a miscellaneous 

 lot of bones gathered from some fossil tissuax'y. 

 Such expressions may be heard as "that seems 

 to be a mammal bone"; "that is a mammal 

 bone";»thatis a iiiajiiinal hone\ that is k mammal 

 tooth — or the substantive mammal alone may be 

 used. Further, whale may be alluded to as a 

 gigantic mammal or a mammal giant. 



The Century and Standard Dictionaries are, 

 therefore, amply jvistif^ed in giving- mammal 

 not only as a noun in the singular number, but 

 alsf), as an adjective. Those dictionaries are 

 the best in existence- not less so, we hope, be- 

 cause we assisted in editing- them I 



But we are in a critical mood and would there- 

 fore call attention to another lapse in the 

 Century Dictionary. It is manifest in the 

 cognate word mammifer thus defined: 



MaMmifkk, ;/. [< NL mammifer, < L. mam- 

 ma, breast, + ferre = E. bear.] An animal 

 having mamma'; a member of the i>ia)ii»ii/era; 

 a mammal. 



If the definition of the word Mammal in the 

 dictionary is surcharged with false analogues, 

 JManimifey has not enough — not a proper one. 

 For a time, in the early years of the centurj-, 

 there was a tendency to use the latter in Eng-- 

 lish, but it was borrowed dii'ectlj' from the 

 French Mamniifere and not the "N. L. [New 

 Latin] 3laiii)nifcre.'' In accordance with its 

 formula the Dictionary, therefore, should have 

 explained as follows: 



*Animus est quo sapimus, anima qua vivimus.— Nonius Marcellus. 



tl<ittre, however, has the words nianinialogie, mamnialogique and mannnalogiste. 



