1866.] Proceedings of the Asiatic Society. 167 



should adopt the same. All European languages have the same word 

 for locomotive, electrophorus, astatic needle, isotherms, &c. These 

 and similar words may be often differently pronounced in different 

 countries. The English pronounce locomotive, the French locomotive 

 and the Germans locomotivay. My learned friend fears that the 

 Indians might imitate the' word, and perhaps pronounce lakmadip 

 and lokhyodibh. There is no harm in that. Only let them spell 

 it as the Western nations do, that treatises written in future by 

 Bengalis, on improvements on locomotives, may be easier understood 

 in Europe. 



The fact that every country speaks a different language, is a for- 

 midable obstacle to the rapid interchange of scientific ideas and 

 facts. A radical difference in terminology would only increase the 

 obstacle. Nor are translations of technical terms here of any use. The 

 Potsdam Society recommended for Jupiter the translation, " Tages- 

 vater," i. e. Father of Day. It was smiled at. What would a Persian 

 say, if you recommended to him for locomotive <*)\ja>^cjso because 

 £*y° means loco and <JDI^ moves ? He would laugh. I am told the 

 Punjabees, on seeing the first locomotive in Amritsir, called it " the 

 iron horse," just as the Roman army fighting in Lucania against 

 King Pyrrhus called the elephant Bos Lucanus, Lucanian ox. But I 

 have no doubt that the iron horse will soon give way to locomotive 

 or Bailgari, just as the Bos Lucanus has given way to Eleplias 

 AfricanusT 



We have then the following additional reasons against a Sanscrit 

 terminology of compounds. First the useless, I might say ludicrous, 

 attempts made in ancient and modern times against the natural 

 development of a language, by dictating to it coined terms. Secondly, a 

 terminology from the Arabic is impossible, as being against the genius 

 of the language. Hence Sanscrit technical terms would suit a 'portion 

 of India only. Thirdly, modern languages have lost the power of forming 

 new roots, (I do not mean derivatives) for new things. New things 

 in our times are invariably expressed by foreign terms. 



Then, in my opinion, we may retain for the purposes of vernacular 

 education the use of those technical terms which the Indian classical 

 languages already possess, but we might fairly recommend the 

 introduction of our Western terminology for such terms as do not 



