261 
IlEPORT — 1847 . 
partly erroneous, and all inaccurate, scientifically speaking. The 
desideratum then vas, that more accurate redexions should be madeoi 
those points by an eminent philosophical mind, witli a full knowledge rf 
all the modern discoveries. This want has been supplied in an adai- 
rable manner by tlie immortal posthumous work of Wilhelm von Hi* 
boldt, the introduction to liis analysis of the Kawi language (ISSfi). 1- 
title of tins introduction is, ‘ Ou the Di\'ersity of the ConstructioK 
Human Language, and its Influence on the Intellectual Devdopmeai r 
Mankind.' Uegiiiuing with the simplest ulumcnis of speech, the illMtn» 
author gradually proceeds to tbc construction of a sentence, as ^eeipr» 
sion of intellect and thought. He then shows that the Chinese is a pefra 
form in its kind. In examining, explaining, and comparing the 
means used by diflerent nations to render single words susceptible * 
signs, destined to mark their position in a sentence, he shows that set® 
plish this, more or less imperfectly, with the exception of the 
family, in which he gives the prize to the language of the Hellenes. lh» 
lie is brought at last irresistibly to the result, that ilic Chinese laugw? 
and the 8anscritic family represent the two extremes of all known fonnUK* 
of speech. With respect to the Seniitio languages, he consider? thM* 
standing on the same line with the Sanscritic, in consequence 
cided tendency towards the system of intlexioiial forms ; other formslw* 
necessarily occupy, according to liini, a place between those twoextren* 
In following out tliis great plan of comparative philosophy 
the different phenomena of language, he does not enter into a 
consideration of the historical problem which is to occupy our atfestJ* 
He consldei’s it possible, that the difTorent classes of formations conslituit- 
it were, the stages of a continual development. It is also 
continues, that such dilTercnt formations may be accompanied by hist' 
affinities, arising out of a common origin. But, he adds, this inustes , 
depend upon historical research*: and into this research he does not • 
nor does ho discuss the method of such an inquiry. He not only 
the historical investigation, hut socnis to declare, in another • 
complex, and satisfactory classification of all languages is an imposwbiuV' 
account of the numbarloss varieties of formationst* i** another, 
of his work, he expresses liis doubts wlicther there may not be a ^ 
iiexion between the Chinese and Burmese languagesj, and gives 
nmrkubUi instances even of gniinmatical affinities. W 
affinity should bo established, it is clear that an immense step would ha 
made towards proving that the language* of the great majority of ^ 
have u common origin. Humboldt therefore was far from denying 
possibility. Under these circumstances we think it safest to expre^ 
result of W. von Humboldt's researches in the very words of 
sentence, of his great work. These remarkable words are the foUowiDS*.. 
“Tlie result of what has been developed hitherto is this. ^ 
expression of grammatical relations by particular signs, and tw? ,. 
extent of words i.s conccriu'd. If we consider the Chinese and the - 
languages aa the extreme points, there is in the other 
between tliose points, whether they keep the syllables separate, or ^ 
inip<.rfpctly to ntnulgamate them, a gmdually increasing : 
the grammatical expression more visible, and to unite svUahleJ 
more Ircely.” 
lo liave estalilishcil this great result, by a scientific method, ‘'■'‘P 
§ 7 p. Uiii. f § 24, p. cccslri. I Ibid. P- 
§ 5, p. 
XXXV. 
