20 ON THE CHINESE SYSTEM OF WRITING. 



that cannot be expected from the efforts of the zealous propagators of the 

 Christian faith. 



The languages of Tunkin and Cochinchina are considered as the same, or 

 nearly the same. They are both monosyllabic, and their grammatical structure 

 does not appear to differ from that of the Chinese. Indeed, it would seem as 

 if the simplicity of monosyllabic languages did not admit of much difference 

 in their syntax. Mr. Naxcra, in his Dissertation on the Language of the 

 Othoni Indians, which has been published in the fifth volume of the new 

 series of our Transactions, has shown the most striking coincidences between 

 the phraseology of that language and that of the Chinese. I am told that there 

 are persons in Europe, and in this country, who contest the fact of the Othoni 

 idiom beiug monosyllabic. If they will only take the trouble to read atten- 

 tively Mr. Naxcra's Dissertation, with the numerous examples that he has 

 given of that language, and the translations that he has made into it, with the 

 addition of grammatical explanations and notes, they will be convinced that it 

 is impossible for human ingenuity to invent and impose upon the learned 

 world such a tissue of imposture as he must necessarily have been guilty of, if 

 his accusers are well grounded in their assertions, and to make a monosyllabic 

 out of a polysyllabic language, without ever contradicting himself or betraying 

 the imposition; besides that there are, in print, several grammars and vocabu- 

 laries of that idiom, by which he might easily be confuted. But it is easier to 

 criticise than to read. 



We should know but very little of the Annamitic languages if it were not 

 for the Cochinchinese vocabularies, for which our country and philology are 

 indebted to the munificence of the reverend father Joseph Morrone. We 

 understand that a complete dictionary of that idiom, compiled by the Vicar 

 Apostolical of the Catholic church in Cochinchina, is now in a course of pub- 

 lication under the auspices of the Honourable the East India Company; and 

 what adds to my satisfaction is, that your respectable correspondent is himself 

 master of that language, and has a dictionary of it in his possession. I regret 

 that he did not take the trouble to give you his opinion of Father Morrone's 

 vocabularies, which, hitherto, I have no reason to believe otherwise than cor- 

 rect, and deserving of full credit. The comparison of this language with the 

 Chinese, by M. de la Palun, is a hasty production, for reasons which I have 

 explained in the preface which precedes them; therefore it would have been 



