582 THE NATURAL HTSTORT REVIEW. 



which bound together in one the dialects of Hindostan and of Persia 

 with some European tongues, and thus was founded the Aryan 

 families of languages. So far, then, we have two, and two only — 

 the Semitic, consisting of some half-dozen Syro- Arabian dialects, and 

 the Aryan, embracing eight important historical families — Celtic, 

 Teutonic, Lithuanian, Slavonic, Hellenico-Italic, Thracian, Armenian, 

 and Iranian. A third northern group, may perhaps, be added, whose 

 affinities have been established by the labours of Klaproth, Scholt, 

 and others. This group consists of five families— viz., Tungusic, 

 Mongolian, Turkic, Einnic, and Samoiedic. And to it has been 

 assigned what we cannot but regard as the unfortunate name Tura- 

 nian. This name the author believed was first used by M. Omalius 

 d'Halloy, and by him applied to the actual Tartars of Touran ; but 

 he has himself abandoned it, because of the wide extension of mean- 

 ing it has received from other hands, and substituted for it the name 

 Alatian — a name which the Tartars of Siberia apply to themselves. 



"We thus know of three linguistic families— Semitic, Aryan, and 

 let us say Alatian. How small a distance, then, have we gone in 

 classifying and in grouping the remaining innumerable tongues — 

 of the languages of the Caucasus, Basque, Malay, Polynesian, North 

 and South American, Chinese, African, Australian. They are all 

 clearly non- Semitic and non- Aryan, and only the name Turanian 

 remains. Now, if it were in any degree established that all non- 

 Aryan and non-Semitic languages fall into one Turanian group, it 

 would throw the great discovery of the Aryan unity completely into 

 the shade. The author believed, however, that the name Turanian 

 ought not to be so applied ; for after admitting the unity of the 

 Semitic, Aryan, and Alatian families, a third name was wanting to 

 conceal our own ignorance of any true principle of unity pervading, 

 or supposed to pervade, the remaining languages of the world. For 

 this purpose we had much better adhere to the purely negative name 

 AUopliyllian, suggested by Dr. Prichard. 



The author agreed with Professor Pott, that it was impossible to 

 suppose a development from Chinese to Greek. The grammar of a 

 language is its unutterable individuality ; it may be cultivated and 

 polished, but it can no more alter its organization than a gardener 

 can change an onion into a potato. A people under stress of con- 

 quest may exchange its own language for another ; but no nation 

 could, or would, of its own accord, alter its own mother speech into 

 one radically difi'erent. We are, therefore, led to conclude that 

 every language at its creation received one ineflaceable stamp. 



