72 



SCIENCE 



[Vol. XVII. No. 418 



the same, with the hope that they will commend themselves 

 to the judgment of other persons engaged in researches re- 

 lating to the languages of North America. 

 • A fixed nomenclature in biology has been found not only 

 to be advantageous, but to be a prerequisite to progress in 

 research, as the vast multiplicity of facts, still ever accumu- 

 lating, would otherwise overwhelm the scholar. In phil- 

 ological classification, fixity of nomenclature is of corre- 

 sponding importance ; and while the analogies between 

 linguistic and biotic classification are quite limited, many of 

 the principles of nomenclature which biologists liave adopted 

 having no application in philology, still, in some important 

 particulars the requirements of all scientific classifications 

 are alike, and, though many of the nomenclatural points met 

 with in biology will not occur in philology, some of them 

 do occur, and may be governed by the same rules. 



Perhaps an ideal nomenclature in biology may sometimes be 

 established, as attempts have been made to establish such a 

 system in chemistry ; and perhaps such an ideal system may 

 eventually be established in philology. Be that as it may, 

 the time has not yet come even for its suggestion. What is 

 now needed are rules of some kmd leading scholars to use 

 the same terms for the same things; and it would seem to 

 matter little in the case of linguistic stocks what the nomen- 

 clature is, provided it becomes denotive and universal. 



In treating of the languages of North America, it has 

 been suggested that the names adopted should be the names 

 by which the people recognize themselves; but this is a rule 

 of impossible application, for, where the branches of a stock 

 diverge very greatly, no common name for the people can 

 be found. Again, it has been suggested that names which 

 are to go permanently into science should be simple and 

 «uphonic. This also is of impossible application, for sim- 

 plicity and euphony are largely questions of personal taste; 

 and he who has studied many languages loses speedily his 

 idiosyncrasies of likes and dislikes, and learns that words 

 foreign to his vocabulary are not necessarily barbaric. 



Biologists have decided that he who first distinctly charac- 

 terizes and names a species or other group shall thereby 

 cause the name thus used to become permanently affixed, 

 but under certain conditions adapted to a growing science 

 which is continually revising its classification. This law of 

 priority may well be adopted by philologists. 



By the application of the law of priority it will occasion- 

 ally happen that a name must be taken which is not wholly 

 unobjectionable, or which could be much improved; but, if 

 names may be modified for any reason, the extent of change 

 that may be wrought in this manner is unlimited, and such 

 modiScations would ultimately become equivalent to the 

 introduction of new names, and a fixed nomenclature would 

 thereby be overthrown. The rule of priority has therefore 

 been adopted. 



Permanent biologic nomenclatiire dates from the time of 

 Linnaeus, simply because this great naturalist established 

 the binominal system and placed scientific classification upon 

 a sound and enduring basis. As Linnasus is to be regarded 

 as the founder of biologic classification, so Gallatin may be 

 considered the founder of systematic philology relating to 

 the North American Indians. Before his time much lin- 

 guistic work had been accomplished; and scholars owe a 

 lasting debt of gratitude to Barton, Adelung, Pickering, and 

 others. But Gallatin's work marks an era in American lin- 

 guistic science from the fact that he so thoroughly intro- 

 duced comparative methods, and because he circumscribed 

 the boundaries of many families, so that a large part of his 



work remains and is still to be considered sound. There is 

 no safe resting-place anterior to Gallatin, because no scholar 

 prior to his time had properly adopted comparative methods 

 of research, and because no scholar was privileged to work 

 with so large a body of material. It must further be said 

 of Gallatin that he had a very clear conception of the task 

 he was performing, and brought to it both learning and 

 wisdom. Gallatin's work has therefore been taken as the 

 starting-point, back of which we may not go in the historic 

 consideration of the systematic philology of North America. 

 The point of departure, therefore, is the year 1836, when 

 Gallatin's "Synopsis of Indian Tribes" appeared in Vol. 

 II. of the "Transactions of the American Antiquarian 

 Society." 



It is believed that a name should be simply a denotive 

 word, and that no advantage can accrue from a descriptive 

 or connotive title. It is therefore desirable to have the 

 names as simple as possible, consistent with other and more 

 important considerations. For this reason it has been found 

 impracticable to recognize as family names designations 

 based on several distinct terms, such as descriptive phrases, 

 and words compounded from two or more geographic names. 

 Such phrases and compound words have been rejected. 



There are many linguistic families in North America, and 

 in a number of them there are many tribes speaking diverse 

 languages. It is important, therefore, that some form 

 should be given to the family name by which it may be dis- 

 tinguished from the name of a single tribe or language. In 

 many cases some one language within a stock has been taken 

 as the type, and its name given to the entire family ; so that 

 the name of a language and that of the stock to which it 

 belongs are the same. This is inconvenient, and leads to 

 confusion. For such reasons it has bpen decided to give 

 each family name the termination " an " or " ian." 



Conforming to the principles thus enunciated, the follow- 

 ing rules have been formulated: — 



1. The law of priority relating to the nomenclature of the 

 systematic philology of the North American tribes shall not 

 extend to authors whose works are of date anterior to the 

 year 1836. 



2. The name originally given by the founder of a linguis- 

 tic group to designate it as a family or stock of languages 

 shall be permanently retained to the exclusion of all 

 others. 



3. No family name shall be recognized if composed of 

 more than one word. 



4. A family name, once established, shall not be cancelled 

 in any subsequent division of the group, but^hall be retained 

 in a restricted sense for one of its constituent portions. 



5. Family names shall be distinguished as such by the 

 termination " an " or "ian." 



6. No name shall be accepted for a linguistic family un- 

 less used to designate a tribe or group of tribes as a linguis- 

 tic stock. 



7. No family name shall be accepted unless there is given 

 the habitat of the tribe or tribes to which it is applied. 



8. The original orthography of a name shall be rigidly 

 preserved, except as provided for in Rule 3, and unless a 

 typographical error is evident. 



The terms " family " and " stock " are here applied inter- 

 changeably to a group of languages that are supposed to be 

 cognate. 



A single language is called a stock or family when it is 

 not found to be cognate with any other language. Lan- 

 guages are said to be cognate when such relations between 



