On an Universal written Character. 281 
applied in the same way, in which mankind have 
been accustomed to use their oral signs, will not the 
same effects follow ? 
To enable us to answer this question in the af- 
firmative, it will be necessary to shew, that all lan- 
guages are perfectly similar in their structure, and 
differ only in the form of the signs employed. 
I have paid some attention to the Latin, Russ, 
and English languages ; and I have also looked into 
the Greek, German, and French. By examples 
from these six tongues, I shall endeavour to shew 
that the structure of all is alike; and I hope I 
shall be likewise able to render it very probable, 
that the number of constituent signs is nearly equal 
in all. 
What has been said concerning the first class of 
constituent signs is, I imagine, enough to point 
them out. It is, however, to be observed, that I 
am not to affirm, that the number of these, in every 
language, is precisely the same. Nor is it neces- 
sary for our purpose-that this should be the case. 
One people may have used compound signs for 
denoting certain ideas, which another may have 
done by arbitrary marks. Thus we say mute, when 
the Russians say dessglassnoz, (bess, without ; glassnoz, 
of, or belonging to voice). We say blind, where | 
the Latins say oculis captus, and the Greeks ao, 
adaoc. This, however, does not contradict my 
general position; because, if enquired into, we shall 
VOL. Vv. M M 
