154 
LANGUAGE. 
tively know the meaning. The fummons of the hen Is 
inftantly obeyed by the whole brood of chickens; and in 
many others of the irrational tribes a fimilar mode of com¬ 
munication may be obferved between the parents and the 
offspring, and between one animal and its cuftomary af- 
fociate. But it is not among animals of the fame fpecies 
only that thefe inftinCtive founds are mutually underltood. 
Jt is as necelfary for animals to know the voices of their 
enemies as thofe of their friends ; and the roaring of 
the lion is a found, of which, previous to all experience, 
every beaft of the foreft is naturally afraid. Between 
thefe animal-voices and the language of men there is how¬ 
ever very little analogy. Human language is capable of 
exprefling ideas and notions, which there is every reafon 
to believe that the brutal mind cannot conceive. ‘'Speech,” 
fays Ariftotle “is made to indicate what is expedient and 
what inexpedient, and in confequence of this what is juit 
and unjuft. It is therefore given to men ; becaufe it is 
peculiar to them, that of good and evil, juft and unjuft, 
they only (with relpeCt to other animals) poffefs a fer.fe or 
feeling.” The voices of brutes feem intended by nature 
to exprefs, not diftinCt ideas or moral modes, but only 
fuch feelings as it is for the good of the fpecies that they 
fliould have the power of making known ; and in this, as 
in all other refpeCts, thefe voices are analogous ; not to 
our fpeaking, but to our weeping, laughing, Ringing, 
groaning, fcreaming, and other natural and audible ex- 
preffions of appetite and paftion. 
Another difference between the language of men and 
tlie voices of brute animals conlilts in articulation , by which 
the former may be refolved into diftinCt elementary founds 
or fyllables; whereas the latter, being for the moft part 
nnarticulated, are not capable of fuch a refolution. Hence 
Homer and Hefiod charaCterife man by the epithet 
or “voice-dividing,” as denoting a power peculiar to the 
human fpecies; for, though there are a few birds which 
titter founds that may be divided into fyllables, yet each 
of thefe birds utters but one fuch found, which feems to 
be employed rather as notes of natural mufic than for the 
purpofe of giving information to others; for, when the 
bird is agitated, it utters cries which are very different, 
and have no articulation. 
A third difference between the language of men and 
the fignificant cries of brute animals, is, that the former is 
from art, and the latter from nature. Every human language 
is learned by imitation, and is intelligible only to thofe 
•who either inhabit the country where it is vernacular, or 
have been taught it by a matter or by books; but the 
voices in queftion are not learned by imitation ; and, being 
■wholly inftinCtive, they are intelligible to all the animals 
of that fpecies by which they are uttered, though brought 
together from the moft diftant countries on earth. That 
a dog, which had never heard another bark, would not- 
withftanding bark himfelf, and that the barkings or yelps 
of a Lapland dog would be inftinCtively underltood by the 
dogs of Spain, Calabria, or any other country, are faffs 
which admit not of doubt: but there is no reafon to ima¬ 
gine that a man who had never heard any language fpo- 
Jcen would himfelf fpeak ; and it is well known that the 
language fpoken in one country is unintelligible to the na¬ 
tives of another country .where a different language is 
fpoken. Herodotus indeed records a faCt which, could it 
be depended upon, would tend to overturn this reafoning, 
as it infers a natural relation between ideas and certain ar¬ 
ticulate founds. He tells us, that Pfammetichus king of 
Egypt, in order to difcover which was the oldeft language, 
caufed two children, newly born of poor parents, to be 
brought up by a fhepherd among his cattle, with a ltriCt 
injunction that they fhould never hear a human voice ; and 
that at the end of two years the children pronounced at 
the fame time the word fiey.zo;, which in the Phrygian 
language (ignified bread. Eitlier this is one of the many 
fables which that credulous hiftorian collected among the 
Egyptians, or the conduit and reafoning of Pfammetichus 
ware very abfurd; for it is added, that from this circunt. 
fiance he inferred that the Phrygians were the moft an¬ 
cient people, and that they fpoke the primitive language. 
The only rational purpofe for which fuch an experiment 
could be inftituted, would be to difcover, not which is 
the oldeft or the lateft language, but whether there bo 
fuch a thing as a language of nature or in (Unit; but in 
fuch a language it is obvious that there could he no word 
to denote bread , becaufe in what is called the ftate of na¬ 
ture bread is unknown. The experiment of Pfammeti¬ 
chus was probably nevermade; but in the woods of different! 
countries folitary favages have at different times been 
caught, who, though they apparently pofl'efled all the faga- 
city which is natural to man, and though their organs 
both of hearing and of fpeech were perfect, never ufed 
articulate founds as figns of fenfations or ideas. They ut¬ 
tered indeedtheinarticulatecries whichare inftinCtively ex- 
preftive of pleafure and pain, of joy and forrow, more difi- 
tinCtly and forcibly than men civilized; but, with refpecl 
to the very rudiments of language, they were what Ho¬ 
race represents all mankind to have been originally, mutim 
et turpe pecus. Indeed it feems to be obvious, that, were 
there any inftinStive language, the firft words uttered by 
all children rvould be the fame ; and that every child, 
whether born in the defert or in fociety, would underftand 
the language of every other child, however educated or 
however negleCted. Nay more, we may venture to affirm, 
that fuch a language, though its general life might, in fo¬ 
ciety, be fuperfeded by the prevailing dialect of art, could 
never be wholly loft; and that no man of one country 
v/ould find it difficult, far lefs impoflible, to communicate 
the knowledge of his natural and moft prefling wants to 
the men of any other country, whether barbarous or civi¬ 
lized. The exercife of cultivated reafon, and the arts of 
civil life, have indeed eradicated many of our original 
inftincts, but they have not eradicated them all. There 
are external indications of the internal feelings and defires, 
which appear in the moft poliftied fociety, and which are 
confeiTediy inftinCtive. The paflions, emotions, fenfa¬ 
tions, and appetites, are naturally exprefled in the coun¬ 
tenance by characters which the favage and the courtier 
can read with equal readinefs. The look ferene, the 
frnoothed brow, the dimpled frnile, and the gliltening eye, 
denote equanimity and good will in terms which no man 
miftakes. The contracted brow, the glaring eye, the ful- 
len gloom, and the threatning air, denote rage, indigna¬ 
tion, and defiance, as plainly and forcibly as revilings or 
imprecations. To teach men to difguife thefe inftinCtive 
indications of their temper, and 
“To carry fmiles and funftiine in their face, 
“ When difeontent fits heavy at their heart,” 
conftitutes a great part of modern and refined education. 
Yet, in fpite of every effort of the utmoft fkill, and of every 
motive refulting from intereft, the moft confummate hy¬ 
pocrite, or the moft hackneyed politician, is not always 
able to prevent his real difpofition from becoming appa¬ 
rent in liis countenance. He may indeed, by long prac¬ 
tice, have acquired a very great command both over his 
temper and over the inftinCtive figns of it; but at times 
nature will predominate over art, and a fudden and vio¬ 
lent paftion will flafh in his face, fo as to be vifible to the 
eye of every beholder. If thefe obfervations be juft, and 
we flatter ourfelves with the belief that no man will call 
them in queftion, it feems to follow, that, if mankind 
were prompted by inftinCl to ufe articulate founds as in¬ 
dications of their paflions, affeCtions, fenfations, and ideas, 
the language of nature could never be wholly forgotten, 
and that it would fometimes predominate over the lan¬ 
guage of art. Groans, fighs, and fome inarticulate lively 
founds, are naturally exprefiive of pain and pleafure, and 
equally intelligible to all mankind. The occafional ufe 
of thefe no art can wholly banifh ; and, if there were ar¬ 
ticulate founds naturally expreifive of the fame feelings 8 
it is not conceivable that art or education . could baniffi 
the ufe of them, merely becaufe by the organs of the 
mouth 
