VOLAPtK. 



797 



placement being retained except for extraor- 

 dinary reasons ; and it is rare now that a 

 German volapukist commits the solecism of 

 putting the accusative before the verb. 



Characteristics. It is the nature of all lan- 

 guage to be regular and symmetrical ; but va- 

 rious historical causes have produced irregu- 

 larities and anomalies interesting to the philol- 

 ogist and not troublesome to those who learn 

 them as part of a mother-tongue. In learning 

 a second language, however, these irregulari- 

 ties present an obstacle which for many is in- 

 superable, so that if one of the national lan- 

 guages were by any possibility adopted for 

 international use, all the other nations would 

 be under a double disadvantage : first, because 

 of having to learn a second idiom ; second, 

 because no reasonable amount of study would 

 ever place them on an absolute equality with 

 its native speakers as to dexterity. This char- 

 acteristic of Volapiik, that it is modeled upon 

 the evolutionary languages, is, in our opinion, 

 the reason of its success. Former systems had 

 attempted too much or too little. Some of 

 them, like Wilkins's and De Mas's, endeavored 

 to classify all ideas and thus became too meta- 

 physical. Others, like Alwato, professed to 

 be revelations of. an inner harmony between 

 sound and meaning, and thus to be the vehi- 

 cles of a universal science. Some of them had 

 no phonetic form, but were mere codes of sym- 

 bols. Naturally, the reader would translate 

 into his own language instead of deriving the 

 knowledge directly through the new medium. 

 Most of these languages were insufficiently 

 worked out, their authors leaving them as 

 sketches only. This was fatal to any hopes of 

 their employment. But Schleyer neither pre- 

 sented something beyond language nor some- 

 thing falling short of the requirements of lan- 

 guage. He made simply a complete, regular, 

 facile language, selecting material and form 

 with rare practical sense. His system has its 

 blemishes ; but, to its credit, it may be said 

 that these blemishes always arise from a devia- 

 tion from the principles laid down by him. 



Adoption of Volapiik. Schleyer's adherents 

 were for some time few and mostly in South 

 Germany. The idea was ignored by the scien- 

 tific and literary world. In 1882 it awakened 

 considerable interest in Austria, and in that 

 year the first society for its propagation was 

 organized at Vienna ; but until 1884 its ad- 

 herents, outside of the German-speaking coun- 

 tries, were few and scattered. In 1884 it in- 

 vaded Holland and Belgium, and numerous so- 

 cieties were formed in those countries. Jn 

 1885, Dr. Auguste Kerckhoffs, professor in the 

 Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commercielles at 

 Paris, introduced it to the French nation 

 through several articles and addresses, creating 

 a great sensation. He wrote excellent text- 

 books on the subject, much more attractive 

 and clear than those of the inventor. Unfor- 

 tunately, he permitted himself to deviate in 

 some points from the system as published by 



the inventor. In themselves these changes 

 were for the most part decided improvements, 

 but to make them without consultation was 

 dangerous to the unity of the movement, on 

 which everything depended. Still, Prof. 

 Kerckhoffs did more than any other to ad- 

 vance the language, and the system has been 

 to some extent modified to harmonize with 

 his views. The other Latin races received an 

 impetus from him, and first Spain, then Italy 

 and Portugal, were aroused to enthusiasm. 

 During 1885 and 1886 Sweden, Denmark, and 

 Eussia were also awakened. Thus the exten- 

 sion of Volaptik over the Continent of Europe 

 was geographical. England has as yet shown 

 but little activity in the matter. 



In the United States there were some learn- 

 ers of Volapiik as early as 1882, mostly of Ger- 

 man origin. Their number gradually increased, 

 but there was little general interest in the mat- 

 ter until June, 1887, when an article on the 

 subject, written by Z. L. White, under the 

 pseudonym of Richmond Walker, appeared in 

 the "American Magazine." This attracted at- 

 tention, and was commented upon by the press. 

 Since that time the interest in the subject has 

 constantly increased, numerous articles and 

 paragraphs in periodical literature have appear- 

 ed, societies or classes have been formed in 

 several towns (Chicago, New Orleans, Milwau- 

 kee, Walla Walla, Alma, etc.) and various text- 

 books have already appeared or are announced 

 for early publication. 



Organization. A convention or meeting of 

 representatives from the various Volapuk so- 

 cieties was held at Friedrichshafen, in August, 

 1884. No very important action was taken, 

 but the dissemination of the language was dis- 

 cussed, and a committee appointed with power 

 to call the next convention, which took place 

 at Munich, in August, 1887. A large number 

 of delegates were present, the Germans greatly 

 preponderating ; in fact, the Latin races were 

 scarcely represented. This congress was very 

 zealous and active. In advance of the organi- 

 zation of an academy, certain urgent linguistic 

 matters were discussed and settled, generally 

 in the direction of the simplifications which 

 Prof. Kerckhoffs had not only recommended, 

 but had somewhat arbitrarily introduced. One 

 of the most curious of these, and worthy of 

 note, was the abolition of the ceremonial pro- 

 noun ons. This ons represented the you of po- 

 liteness, the Germnn Sie, Spanish Usted. The 

 use of Sie had led the Germans, apparently, to 

 consider the second person singular ihou as dis- 

 respectful, a purely conventional and fictitious 

 idea, Therefore Schleyer provided a special 

 word for it, a word which violated several 

 canons. It has the plural form, although us- 

 ually singular in meaning; it is incapable of 

 forming a plural when several are addressed ; 

 it should logically be the plural of on, the in- 

 definite pronoun. As the use of this form onx 

 was optional, many volnpuki*ts rejected it, em- 

 ploying ol. The conservatives combated this 



