DEVELOPMENT OF LANGUAGE. 303 
a determinative element. Finally, in the inflected 
languages, the determinating element, of which the 
determinating significance has long vanished from the 
national consciousness, unites into a whole with the 
formative element. As we have said, this development, 
in which retrogression takes an extensive share, is uni- 
versally admitted. Opinions differ only as to the origin 
of the linguistic material, which -the acuteness of the 
philosophers extracts in the guise of “roots.” A great 
authority, Max Miiller,** discerns in the existence of the 
roots evidence of the absolute separation of man from 
the animal. While Locke says that man is distinguished 
from the animal by the power of forming general ideas, 
the philologist ought to say that. human language is 
distinguished from the animal capacity of communica- 
tion by the power of forming roots. To trace up all 
words to imitation and exclamatory sounds is inadmis- 
sible, as we most frequently come upon roots of fixed 
form and. general. meaning which are inexplicable in 
themselves. He deems the existence of these ready- 
made roots, before which linguistic science stands help- 
less, an insurmountable impediment to the apprehension 
of man as a link in the general evolution of organisms. 
This point excepted, this excellent scholar naturally 
admits all those phenomena of heredity, acquisition, 
and degeneration, which are manifested in the laws ot 
language, and find their most perfect analogies in our 
doctrine of Descent. If, for instance, we compare Zend 
with Sanscrit, and hear several of its words explained, 
we are at once reminded of the rudimentary organs and 
their significance. A host of anomalies are, like the 
isolated organisms of present times, primeval and 
14 
