CHAP. I.] WORDS AND THEIR SIGNS. 215 



live upon the main stock, neglecting to cultivate the fields 

 of science, and reap a new harvest of discoveries.^ 



We next proceed to the art of delivering, uttering, and 

 communicating such things as are discovered, judged of, and 

 treasured up in the memory ; and this we call by the general 

 name of traditive doctrine, which takes in all the arts relating 

 to words and discourse. For although reason be as the soul 

 of discourse, yet they ought both to be treated sepai-ate, no 

 less than the soul and body. We divide this traditive doc- 

 trine into three parts; viz., with regard, 1. to the organ; 2. tho 

 method; and 3. the illustration or ornament of speech and 

 discourse. 



The vulgar doctrine of the organ of speech called grammar 

 is of two kinds, the one having relation to speaking, the 

 other to writing. For, as Aristotle well observed, words arc 

 the marks of thoughts, and letters of words ; and we refer 

 both of these to grammar.*^ But before we proceed to its 

 several parts, it is necessary to say something in general ol 

 the organ of this traditive doctrine, because it seems to have 

 more descendants besides words and letters. And here we 

 observe, that whatever may be split into differences, suffi- 

 ciently numerous for explaininf; the variety of notions, 

 13rovided these differences are S'jnsible, may be a means oi 

 conveying the thoughts from man to man ; for we find that 

 nations of different languages hold a commerce, in some 

 tolerable degree, by gestures. And from the practice oi 

 some persons born deaf and dumb, but otherwise ingenious, 

 we see conversation may be held betwixt them and such ol 

 their friends as have learned their gestures. And it is now 

 well known, that in China and the more eastern provinces, 

 they use at tliis day certain real, not nominal characters,^ to 



•» Pantagniel, ii. 6, 6. " Interpret, i. 2. 



<* The original is, "nee literas nee verba," which in Latin signify oral as 

 well as written language ; so that, to avoid equivocation, we should annex 

 the two adjectives, sonorous nnd written, to fix their signification. With 

 regard to the relation which exists between the oral and written speech 

 of the Chinese, it is, as the text would imply, not different from that 

 which prevails among us. In articulating, we pronounce as the Chinese 

 the sonorous signs which correspond to the written words, and their art 

 of reading, no less than ours, consists in the struggle to transplant this 

 correspondence in our minds, and learn its reciprocal relations. Even 

 fcUowing that the Chines?, in addition to their vulgar tongue, lad 



