224 MAJOR C. BR: CONDER; R:E., D:Cil., LED. Me Rakes, 
Not only do the roots which he observes in Finnic languages, 
as well as in Aryan, exist also in Turkic and Mongol speech, 
when they are beyond suspicion of Aryan influence, but 
they are very often traceable also in Akkadian, back to at 
least 2000 BG.; and as shown in the table of commen roots, 
they can further be traced to Egyptian and Semitic 
vocabularies. In the same manner the comparisons which 
Gesenius hazarded, when as yet the comparative study of 
Aryan speech was in its infancy, are confirmed by that study, 
since the roots have been extended from the Greek, on which 
he mainly relied, to the whole circle of European speech. 
The Semitic languages are singularly rich in distinctions of 
meaning, and in the addition of new roots formed from the 
old, but those which remain clearly traceable to one old 
common form are so numerous as at once to reduce the 
vocabulary by considerably more than half, and in the end 
it would appear that the original roots are not more 
numerous in Semitic than those of other families of speech. 
The traditional pronunciation of Hebrew will often mislead us 
in such enquiry, since it is no more reliable than in our modern 
conventional pronunciation of Latin or Greek, but we are 
fortunately able to attain to some certainty as to ‘the real pro- 
nunciation, by means of the Assyrian syliabary, as compared 
with the living laneuages of Syria and Arabia. The Hebrew 
points which now enide us were only invented in the sixth 
century A.D., but that it was possible to read without them is 
clearly shown by the existence of Hebrew, Moabite, and 
Phoenician unpointed mscriptions. The simple elements of the 
original Semitic grammar did not in fact depend on those dis- 
tinctions which are now indicated by the points and diacritic signs. 
In making such comparisons we may well feel astonished, 
not that such wide difference should have arisen, but rather 
that the original connection should remain so clearly trace- 
able. It has been often said that the similarities of language 
are more valuable as evidence than are the dissimilarities. 
We do not doubt that our Aryan ancestors had mouths 
because we call it “mouth,” while the Italian uses the word 
bocca; but when we turn from bocca to the French bouche, we 
at once recognise an original connection. Various words 
have been used by various sections of a people of common 
original vocabulary, and many old words have died out in 
various degrees among various peoples. It is remarkable 
that though the Aryans lived by rivers, their original word 
for “fish” has been lost, and in this manner the common 
