THE LAWS OF SPEECH. 203 



the argument which it is the object of physiological evidence to 

 substantiate and support. The subject of speech in its physiolo- 

 gical relations has been needlessly complicated in certain quarters 

 by a tendency to overlook the very plain but important evidence 

 which the study of such conditions as idiocy and deaf-mutism in 

 man affords respecting the origin of language; whilst the observation 

 of lower life and its peculiarities may serve to aid us, as before, in 

 the further understanding of the evolution of words. Instinctively 

 we recognise the cry of pain or fear, in lower life, as distinguished 

 from the audible expression of joy ; and in human existence there 

 are analogous means for conveying to others precisely the same 

 information of our mental states and conditions. There can be little 

 difficulty in satisfying ourselves that an imitative tendency uncon- 

 sciously exercised, as man's intelligence awoke to its new and higher 

 duties, would amply suffice to develop and perfect the acquirement 

 of words and the enlargement of ideas. 



Nor is such an involuntary tendency of the mind to excite intui- 

 tions and ideas unrepresented in ourselves, or in other mental acts 

 than those concerned in the production of words. "Each word," 

 says Dr. Maudsley, " represents a certain association and succession 

 of muscular acts, and is in itself nothing more than a conventional 

 sign or symbol to mark the particular muscular expression of a 

 particular idea. The word has not independent vitality ; it differs 

 in different languages ; and those who are deprived of the power of 

 articulate speech must make use of other muscular acts to express 

 their ideas, speaking, as it were, in a dumb discourse. There is 

 no reason on earth, indeed, why a person might not learn to 

 express every thought which he can utter, in speech, by movements 

 of his fingers, limbs, and body by the silent language of gesture." 

 Such remarks have a special and authoritative bearing on the 

 opinion expressed in a former part of this paper concerning the 

 importance of primary gestures and signs over sounds, as factors 

 in the production of language. The movements of speech, then, 

 do not differ in kind from those exhibited as the result of 

 other bodily actions ; their connection with the mind is simply 

 more intimate than that which is implied, say, in the act of 

 raising the hand to the mouth. The connexus which has been 

 established between brain and larynx is simply of a more deli- 

 cate nature, simply responds more accurately because, perhaps, 

 more frequently to the calls made upon it in the production of 

 words than the relation existing between brain and finger. There 

 is the closest of parallelisms to be drawn in respect of the action 

 and reaction of mind upon visible speech, between the production 

 of words and the reception of sensations of light by the eye or 

 of sounds by the ear. Delicate impulses transmitted to the brain 



