RELATIONS OF COMPARATIVE GRAMMAR 43 



between psychology and comparative grammar, and we may con- 

 sider for a moment how far it is possible to define the respective 

 functions of each in the study of language. It is the part of compar- 

 ative grammar to present the facts of language in their historical 

 relations, to show what changes language has actually undergone, 

 and under what immediate linguistic influences. The psychological 

 processes of which the linguistic changes are the outward sign it is the 

 part of psychology to interpret and define. The psychology of lan- 

 guage is of course a branch of general psychology, and is in a sense 

 the application of general psychological principles to linguistic 

 phenomena. At the same time it is justly claimed for the newest 

 psychology of language that it does not represent a sort of external 

 application to linguistic phenomena of a preconceived system of 

 psychology, but that its principles are deduced -from its linguistic 

 phenomena themselves. In other words, it does not regard itself 

 merely as an auxiliary to language history, furnishing it with a set of 

 principles determined from other sources, but it holds that language 

 is in itself one of the most worthy objects of psychological investi- 

 gation, one of the most promising sources of psychological truth. 

 From this point of view, according to which language is an object 

 of intrinsic interest no less to the psychologist than to the historian of 

 language, the relation between the two sciences is closer than ever 

 before. And if we have correctly defined their respective functions, 

 it does not by any means follow that the representatives of each 

 confine themselves strictly within these limits. The comparative 

 grammarian may supplement his historical investigation of certain 

 linguistic phenomena by a consideration of the more immediate 

 psychological factors involved. Nor will the psychologist feel de- 

 barred from all independent assumptions as to historical relations. 

 Such overlapping of their activities is not only permissible but de- 

 sirable, for it should lead to increased sympathy and cooperation. 



The Relation to Ethnology and History 



The vital relation of language and history was recognized by Leib- 

 nitz in the seventeenth century, and his deep interest and activity 

 in collecting linguistic material was determined by its value in the 

 study of ethnological relations. And when in the beginning of the 

 nineteenth century comparative grammar was established on a sci- 

 entific footing, the possibilities of the new science made a deep im- 

 pression upon Alexander von Humboldt, whose words (Kosmos, n, 

 p. 142), slightly abridged, are as follows: "Compared among them- 

 selves and separated into families according to their inner structure, 

 languages have become (and this is one of the most brilliant achieve- 



