COMPARATIVE PHILOLOGY. 2S3 



Chinese, or of agglutinative like the Magyar and Turkish, 

 shows that the development is not a necessary one." * 



1 could quote other passages to the same effect ; but the 

 above are sufficient to show that we must not unreservedly 

 accept the earlier doctrmes previously sketched. There is, 

 indeed, no question about the fact of language-growth as 

 regards particular languages ; the question here is as to the 

 evolution of language-types one from another. And I have 

 given prominence to this question in order to make the 

 following remarks upon it. 



When we are told that "the continued existence of iso- 

 lating tongues like the Chinese, or of agglutinative tongues like 

 the Magyar and Turkish, shows that the development is not 

 a necessary one," we of course at once perceive the unquestion- 

 able truth of the statement. But the fact is without relevance 

 to the only question in debate. The continued existence of 

 the Protozoa unquestionably proves that their development 

 into the Metazoa is not necessary ; but this fact raises no pre- 

 sumption at all against the doctrine that all the Metazoa have 

 been evolved from the Protozoa. 



Similarly, when we are told that "what we really mean 

 when we say that one language is more advanced than 

 another, is that it is better adapted to express thought," we 

 are again being shunted from the question. The question is 

 whether one type of language-structure develops into another ; 

 not whether, when developed, it is ^' more advanced'' than 

 another in the sense of being "better adapted to express 

 thought." This it may or may not be ; but in either case the 

 question of its efficiency as a language has no necessary 

 connection with the question of its development as a language 

 For it may very well be that from the same origin two or 

 more lines of development may occur in different directions. 

 It is doubtless perfectly true, as Professor Sayce says, that 

 modern Chinese is a higher product of evolution than ancient 

 Chinese along the line of isolating condensation ; but this is 



• Ibid.f p. 1 20. See also his rrinciples of Comparative rhilolo^^^ 2ncl ed., 

 p. ix. 



