165 
another word tacked on to the root in such a way that it has lost part of its 
sound. I think that is a very important point. It clears up matters of 
grammar as well as matters of vocabulary. Both differ very much ; but I 
believe if we examined the question, we should find that the differences of 
grammar are the greater and the more important of the two. There is one 
other point to which I wish to call attention. I think Dr. Thornton showed 
great wisdom in not pressing his argument for the unity of language as neces- 
sarily destructive to the polygenous theory. It is plainly possible, a priori , 
that the different races of men may have descended from different original 
stocks, and yet possess similar and apparently related languages. For, whether 
from one stock or from many, it is certain that there is a very close resem- 
blance between human beings of different races. All are formed in the same 
way ; all are possessed of similar organs of speech. It is therefore a moral 
certainty that, however originated, their languages would also be similar. 
Scripture, indeed, tells us that the polygenous theory is incorrect, and so leads 
us to adopt another explanation of ' these phenomena, but if we had no 
revelation to tell us, we could not arrive at that conclusion from the simi- 
larity discovered between one language and another. Again, with regard 
to the monogenous theoiy, it is no disproof of that theory, that differences in 
lauguage exist ; but it is no proof of it, that similarities exist ; because 
they can be accounted for on other grounds. Take the instance quoted by 
Dr. Thornton, the great resemblance of the word father in all languages. I 
do not know whether he quoted also the word mother, but I believe it would 
be found that nearly all the words which represent father and mother in dif- 
ferent languages, possess one or two sounds which are closely related to the 
sounds of Pa and Ma. This might seem a proof that all languages came from 
the same source ; but there is another explanation of it, which is this— that 
those are likely to be just the sort of sounds that children would first make 
in addressing their father or mother. It is therefore only natural that they 
should be nearly alike in all languages. The only case in which similarity 
affords really a good argument is when you can show a number of words 
which are similar ; but it is rather a hazardous argument to contend that 
races are identical because languages are similar. (Hear, hear.) 
Rev. W. Niven. I should highly value the lecturer’s opinion with respect 
to the following passage in the third chapter of the book of Zephaniah, v. 9 : 
“ For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call 
on the name of the Lord, to serve Him with one consent.” 
Capt. Fishbourne. — It occurred to me, taking the language as we find it in 
Scripture, from the speech of God with Adam, as well as the speech of 
the devil with Eve — that language must have been in a much more perfect 
condition than the arguments of the polygenists would admit of. I would go 
a little further, and say that if Dr. Thornton had enlarged in that direction 
he must have told us that language is more than a means of communication. 
I think we must consider language as something more than a mere philolo- 
gical science ; it is the instrument of thought. Without language I do not 
think we could excogitate. I think that the fact of the devil speaking to 
