218 Baron Humboldt's Essay on the Oriental Languages. 



inflexions added to the end of the root, but tiie affix of the first person 

 singular is in both cases the syllable mi. 



Tliere is then in the examples adduced a conformity in grammatical 

 use, and at the same time in sound ; and it is impossible to deny that the 

 languages which possess these forms must be of the same family. 



The difference between the real affinity of languages, whicii presumes a 

 filiation as it were among the nations who speak them, and that degree of 

 relation which is purely historical, and only indicates temporary and ac- 

 cidental connexions among nations, is, in my opinion, of the greatest 

 importance. Now it appears to me impossible ever to ascertain that 

 difference merely by the examination of words ; especially, if we examine 

 but a small number of them. 



It is perhaps too much to assert, that words pass from age to age and 

 from nation to nation ; that they arise also from connexions (which though 

 secret, are common to all men) between sounds and objects, and that they 

 thus establish a certain identity between all languages ; wliile the manner 

 of casting and arranging these words, tliat is to say, the grammar, con- 

 stitutes the particular differences of dialects. This assertion, I repeat, is 

 perhaps too bold, when expressed in this general way ; yet I am strongly 

 inclined to consider it correct, provided tlie expression grammar be not 

 taken vaguely, but with u due regard to tiie sounds of grammatical forms. 

 But whatever opinion may be entertained with respect to this manner of 

 considering the difference of languages, it appears to mc at all events 

 demonstrated : 



First, that all researcli into the affinity of languages, which does not 

 enter quite as much into the examination of the grammatical system as into 

 that of words, is faulty and imperfect ; and. 



Secondly, that the proofs of the real affinity of languages, that is to 

 say, the question whether two languages belong to the same family, ought 

 to be principally deduced ft'om the grammatical system, and can be deduced 

 from that alone ; since the identity of words only proves a resemblance 

 such as may be purely historical and accidental. 



Sir James Mackintosh rejects the examination of grammar, for this 

 reason, that languages which are evidently of the same stock have very dif- 

 ferent grammars. But we must not be misled by this phenomenon, although 

 it is in itself quite true. The grammatical form of languages depends, on the 



