2^8 MENTAL EVOLUTION IN MAN. 



fore, that they both err in so often assuming that these cases 

 are mutually exclusive. 



It will thus be apparent that I am altogether in favour of 

 the polyphylectic theory of language-development. Even if 

 it were not for the specially philological considerations just 

 adduced, on grounds of merely general reasoning it would 

 appear to me much more probable that so useful a sociological 

 instrument as that of articulate sign-making should have been 

 evolved from the sign-making of tone and gesture, wherever 

 the psychological powers of mankind were far enough 

 advanced to admit of the evolution. And, if this is so, it 

 clearly becomes probable that any aboriginal races which 

 were geographically separated would have slowly and 

 independently elaborated their primitive forms of utterance — 

 supposing, of course, that mankind had become segregated 

 while still in the speechless state, which, as I will subsequently 

 explain, seems to me the most probable supposition. And, if 

 this were the case, it appears to me highly improbable that 

 languages which originated and developed independently of 

 one another should all have been under the necessity of 

 starting either on the monosyllabic, the polysynthetic, or any 

 other type exclusively. That the existing languages of the 

 earth did originate in more than one centre is now the almost 

 universal belief of competent authorities.* But too many of 

 these authorities are still bound by what appears to me the 

 wholly gratuitous and highly improbable assumption, that 

 although various languages thus originated in different 

 centres, they must all have been born with an exact family 

 resemblance to one another, so far as type or " genius " is 



* "The number of separate families of speech now existing in the world, which 

 cannot be connected with one another, is at least seventy-five ; and the number 

 will doubtless be increased when we have grammars and dictionaries of the 

 numerous languages and dialects which are still unknown, and better information 

 as regards those with which we are partially acquainted. If we add to these the 

 innumerable groups of speech which have passed away without leaving behind 

 even such waifs as the Basque of the Pyrenees, or the Etruscan of ancient Italy, 

 some idea will be formed of the infinite number of primaeval centres or com- 

 munities in which language took its rise" (Sayce, Introduction, ^c, ii. 323). 



