Indo-European Languages. 295 



that the Armenian is Indo-European. Perhaps the well- 

 known affinity between the Armenian and Phrygian lan- 

 guages directed philologists to a comparison between the 

 Armenian and Greek. MUller, in his Dorians, points out the 

 inflexion of the Armenian verb-substantive. 



3. Since the fixation of the Celtic, it has been considered 

 that the old Etruscan is Indo-European. 



4. Since the fixation of the Celtic, it has been considered 

 that the Albanian is Indo-European. 



5. Since the fixation of the Celtic, Indo-European elements 

 have been indicated in the Malay. 



6. Since the fixation of the Celtic, Indo-European elements 

 have been indicated in the Laplandic. 



7. Since the fixation of the Celtic, it has been considered 

 that the Ossetic is Indo-European. 



8. Since the consideration of the Ossetic as Indo-European, 

 the Georgian has been considered as Indo-European likewise. 



Now the criticism of the theory which makes the Georgian 

 to be Indo-European, is closely connected with the criticism 

 of the theory which makes the Ossetic and the Malay to be 

 Polynesian ; and this the writer reserves for a separate pa- 

 per. All that he does at pi*esent is to express his opinion, 

 that if any of the seven last-named languages are Indo-Eu 

 ropean, they are Indo-European not by real addition, in the 

 way of recognised relationship, but by verbal extension of the 

 power of the term Indo-European. He also believes that this 

 is the view which is taken, more or less consciously or un- 

 consciously, by the different authors of the different classifi- 

 cations themselves. If he be wrong in this notion, he is at 

 issue with them as to a matter of fact ; since, admitting some 

 afi&nity on the part of the languages in question,' he denies 

 that it is that affinity which connects the Greek and German, 

 the Latin and Lithuanian. 



On the other hand, if he rightly imagine that they are 

 considered as Indo-European on the strength of some other 

 affinity, wider and more distant than that which connects the 

 Greek with the German, or the Latin with the Lithuanic, he 

 regrets that such an extension of a term should have been 

 made without an exposition of tlie principle that suggested 



