324 
elements of which they are compounded bore a resemblance [in 
some way or other] to the objects of which the names are the 
imitation.” Very true ; but, be it remembered, this 64 resem- 
blance ” may have been merely in the mind of the name-giver. 
44 And the original elements are letters,” or, rather, sounds. 
The alphabet is comparatively modern, and Sokrates is only 
thinking of the Hellenic alphabet. A practical age grouped 
these 44 original elements ” in an alphabetic combination. 
How, then, do letters imitate ? Various ideas are imitated 
by various sounds. Sokrates modestly observes that his 44 notions 
of original names are truly wild and ridiculous ” ; but, as 
Prof. Jowett observes, 44 Plato’s analvsis of the letters of the 
alphabet shows a wonderful insight into the nature of language.”* 
The 44 notions ” of Sokrates on some letter-meanings are as 
follows : — 
a expressed size, because a 44 great letter.” How 44 great ” I 
am not clear, whether as most important,! as the head of the 
alphabet, as being often written larger, or otherwise. Professor 
Jowett observes that 44 in the use of the letter a to express size, 
the imitation is symbolical.” How the sound a was supposed 
to express size I know not ; but Plato’s obscure reason points 
more to the letter itself than to its sound. Cf. his explanation 
of o. 
y, a heavy sound. 
yX, 44 the notion of a glutinous, clammy nature.” Vide y 
and X. 
S, r, expressive of binding and rest, on account of the closing 
ajid pressure of the tongue. 
?, cr, cj), are used to imitate what is windy, their pronuncia- 
tion being accompanied by great expenditure of breath. 
77, length ; because a 44 long ” letter (double s). A 44 great 
letter.” Vide a. 
l expresses 44 the subtle elements which pass through all 
things.” 
It is 44 imitative of motion, Uvai , ’UvOai.” This imita- 
tion consists in the quickness and comparative noiselessness 
of its pronunciation, which Plato contrasts with the agitation 
of the tongue in p. This is the most interesting of these com- 
parisons, because it is not palpably obvious ; and yet Plato’s 
view seems to have been that adopted by Aryan man. Thus, 
we find the Proto-Aryan root i ( ja , ya ), 44 to go,” Sk. i , 
Grk. ei-mi, Lat. e-o , i-mus, Lith. ei- mi, Slav, i-du, etc. So i in 
* Jowett, The Dialogues of Plato, ii. 191. 
t Vide the Alpha-speech ( R.M.A . , Appendix B.). 
