Indo-European Languages. 301 



at which certain languages are given off from their parent 

 stocks, such must be the case. 



Now, although this is a difficulty, it is no greater difficulty 

 than the geologists must put up with. With them also there 

 are the phenomena of transition, and such- phenomena en- 

 gender unavoidable complication. Tliey do so, however, with- 

 out overthrowing the principles of their classification. 



The position of a language in respect to its stage of de- 

 velopment is one thing,— the position in respect to its allied 

 tongues another. 



Two languages may be in the same stage (and, as such, 

 agree), yet be very distant from each other in respect to affi- 

 liation or affinity. Stage for stage the French is more clasely 

 connected with the English, than the English with the Moeso- 

 Gothic. In the way of affiliation, the converse is the case. 



Languages are allied (or, what is the same thing, bear 

 evidence of their alliance), according to the number of forms 

 that they have in common; since (subject to one exception) 

 these common forms must have been taken from the com 

 mon mother-tongue. 



Two languages separated from the common mother-tongue, 

 subsequent to the evolution of {sai/) a form for the dative 

 case, are more allied than two languages similarly separated 

 anterior to such an evolution. 



Subject to one exception. This means, that it is possible 

 that two languages may appear under certain circumstances 

 more allied than they really are, and vice versa. 



They may appear more allied than they really are, when, 

 after separating from the common mother-tongue durino- the 

 ante-inflexionary stage, they develop their inflexions out of 

 the same principle, although independently. This case is 

 more possible than proved. 



They may appear less allied than they really are, when, 

 although separated from the common mother-tongue after 

 the evolution of a considerable amount of inflexion, each 

 taking with it those inflexions, the one may retain them, 

 whilst the other loses them in toto. This case also is more 

 possible than proved. 



VOL. XLVII. NO. XCIV. — OCTOBER 1849. X 



