337 
It was with some trouble that their tongues were loosened.* 
Thus, as we all know without any experiment, children imitate 
their companions ; but it further appears that the influence of 
the latter may be strong enough even to set aside the ordinary 
course of nature. 
Believing that language was primarily used by the man, not 
by the child, I do not think that very much is to be learnt from 
children in the matter, because we miss the comparatively 
thoughtful and mature intelligence that was first employed 
upon the formation of words. Yet that occasional hints and 
illustrations of great value may be obtained from observation of 
the earliest linguistic operations of children is undoubted, as the 
following instance will show. A little boy 44 showed, in early 
infancy, a peculiar tendency to form new words.” It will be 
observed that such a tendency is decidedly uncommon. 44 He 
established in the nursery the word nim for everything fit to 
eat. First, he expressed his satisfaction at seeing his meal, by the 
natural humming sound hm. Gradually it changed into the 
more articulate um and im. Finally, an n was placed before 
it. But soon the growing mind began to generalize, and nim 
came to signify everything edible ; so that the boy would add 
the words good or bad, which he had learned in the mean time. 
He would now say good nim , bad nim . On one occasion he 
said fie nim , for bad, repulsive to eat. There is no doubt but 
that a verb to nim, for to eat, would have developed itself, had 
not the ripening mind adopted the vernacular language, which 
was offered to it ready - made.”f So, again, amongst the 
Papuans 44 eating was called nam-nam, from the noise produced 
by the process ” and in Akkadian the greedy wolf is called nim 
or num. In the above case of nim we have a rare and 
admirable instance, showing how the rational mind deliberately 
strengthens a sound into a word. Prof. Sayce quotes a dictum 
of Proklos that 44 men create speech, not, however, deliberately 
and with intention, but instinctively through the impulse of 
their nature.” The error here lies in the 64 but ” ; there is no 
real antithesis. Men create speech instinctively and naturally, 
and yet also deliberately and purposely. Here we have a case 
of occult imitation ; of course the lips may be opened and 
closed silently, yet it will probably be admitted that it is very 
natural to accompany this movement with the sound em, um , 
mem, in fact, an m sound. Cf. and Sanskrit root mu, 44 to tie, 
* The Jesuit Father Catrou ap. Tylor, Early Hist, of Mankind , 80, 81. 
t Lieber, ap. Taine, On Intelligence (Eng. Trans.), 402-3. 
+ Cornrie, ap. Sayce, Introd. Sci. Lang., i. 108. 
