158 LANG 
trace the remains of one original language through a great 
part of the globe at this day. Numberlefs inftances of 
this might be given, but our limits will enable us to pro¬ 
duce only a very few. In the Sanlkrit, or ancient' lan¬ 
guage of the Gentoos, our. fignifies a day. (See Halhed’s 
Preface to the Code of Gentoo Laws.) In other eaftern 
languages, the fame word was ufed to denote both light 
and fire. Thus, in the Chaldee, ur is fire-, in the Egyp¬ 
tian, or is the fun or light, (Pint, de Ofir. et Hid.) In the 
Hebrew, aur is light: in the Greek, ayg is the air, often 
light: in Latin, aura is the air, from the ./Eolic Greek ; 
and in Irifh it is aear. From the very fame original we 
have the Greek word vrv%, and the Englifli fire. In He¬ 
brew, or fignifies to raifie, lift up one's fielfi, or be raified: 
hence plainly are derived the Greek og«, to raifie, excite, 
and the Latin orior to arifie ; whence oriens, the ealt, and 
Eng. orient, oriental-, alfo Lat. origo, and Eng. origin, ori¬ 
ginate, Sec. The word light Englifh, lucht Flemilh, 
lux Roman, and Greek, lias been traced to Egypt. 
Aretz, arek, erech, hertha, earth, and erde, are 
all one word, from Paleftine and Chaldea to Britain and 
Germany. The Chaldeans turned the Hebrew word shur 
or shor, which fignifies an ox, into thor, as likewife did 
the Phenicians ; (fee Plut. Vit. Syll.) hence the Greek 
'ravgoi;, the Latin taurus, the French taureau, and the Ita¬ 
lian and Spanifh toro. The Hebrew word bit or eeith, 
which fignifies cavity, capacity, the concave or infide of any 
place, has fpread itfelf far and wide, ftil! retaining nearly 
the original fignification ; in the Perfian language it is bad, 
bed, ehad, and fignifies a houfie or abode. In all the dia¬ 
lers of the Gothic tongue, bode fignifies the fame thing; 
Fence the Englifh abide, abode, booth, boat, and the French 
bateau. In all thefe inftances there is a ftriking refern- 
blance, in found as well as in fenfe, between the derived 
and the primitive words; but this is not always the cafe, 
even when of the legitimacy of the derivation no doubt 
can be entertained. It has been fliown (fee BoAvell’s 
Life of Johnfon), that the French jour, a day, is derived 
from the Latin dies; but it may be certainly traced from 
a higher fource. In many of the oriental dialefts, di, 
bright, is a name of the fun-, hence the Greek Aij, Jupiter, 
and the Latin dies, a day. From dies comes diurnus ; 
in the pronunciation of which, either by the inaccuracy 
of the ipeaker or of the hearer, diu is readily confounded 
with giu ; then of the ablative of this adjeflive, corruptly 
pronounced giurno, the Italians make a fublftantive gior- 
ko, which by the French is readily contracted intociouR 
or jour. From the fame root di, comes At or, a, ov, the 
Eolic AiFo;, the Latin divus, and the Celtic dhia, God. 
Language, whatever was its origin, mull be fubjeft to 
perpetual changes from its very nature, as well as from 
that variety of incidents which affeft all fublunary things; 
and thofe changes mull always correfpond with the change 
of circumftances in the people by whom the language is 
fpoken. When any particular fet of ideas becomes pre¬ 
valent among any fociety of men, words mull be adopted 
to exprefs them; and from thefe the language mud all’ume 
its charader. Hence the language of a brave and martial 
people is bold and nervous, although perhaps rude and 
uncultivated ; while the languages of thofe nations in 
which luxury and effeminacy prevail, are flowing and har¬ 
monious, but devoid of force and energy of expreffion. 
New difeoveries and particular circumftances have en¬ 
riched or overloaded language. How many new words, 
and new meanings to old ones, were added by the French 
republicans! Thefe are now fallen into difufe; but thofe 
produced by the new cbemiftry ftill remain, nor indeed can 
we do without them; and Dr. Davy’s ftill more recent dif¬ 
eoveries have increafed them. Yet it is Angular how few 
terms Newton invented. Whatever language he found in 
common ufe, of that he availed himfelf. Scarcely ever did 
lie ufe a known word in a novel fenfe; and the language 
which he found ready made he ufed in inch a manner as 
to convey no inconfiderable number of difeoveries, the moll 
important and the moll original that mortal man has ever 
UAGE, 
been permitted to make. To the inventors of new terms, 
and to nomenclature-mongers, this will fpeak with a force 
that Ihould reftrain them from, loading fcience with a lan¬ 
guage that muft, for a time, be little better than a jargon. 
What was the antediluvian language, or whether it was 
divided into a variety of dialeCts as at this day, can only 
be determined by the rules of analogy; and thefe will lead 
us to believe, that whatever might have been the primi¬ 
tive language of mankind, if human nature was then con- 
ftituted as it is at prefent, a great variety of dialects mull 
of neceffily have fprung up in the fpace of near 2000 
years. If we adopt the Mofaic account of the antedilu¬ 
vian events, we muft admit that the defeendants of Cain 
for fome ages lived feparate from thofe of Seth. Their 
manner of life, their religious ceremonies, their laws, their 
form of government, were probably different; and thefe. 
circumftances would of courfe produce a variety in their 
language. The polterity of Cain were an inventive race: 
they found out the art of metallurgy, mafic, and fome 
think of weaving; and in all probability many other arti¬ 
cles conducive to the eafeand accommodation of life were 
the produce of their ingenuity. A people of this charac¬ 
ter muft have paid no fmall regard to their words and 
modes of expreffion. Wherever raulic is cultivated, lan¬ 
guage will naturally be improved and refined. When new 
in ventions are introduced, a new race of words and phrafes 
of neceffity fpring up, correfponding to the recent flock 
of ideas to he intimated. Befides, among an inventive 
race of people, new vocables would be continually fabri¬ 
cated, in order to fupply the deficiencies of the primitive 
language, which was probably fcanty in words, and its 
phrafeology unpolifhed. 
That family of which Noah was defeended had not in¬ 
corporated with the race of Cain: it was, according to the 
facred hiftorian, lineally defeended from Seth, and had 
preferved the worfhip of the true God, when, it is proba¬ 
ble, the greateft part of mankind had apoftatiied and be¬ 
come idolaters. According both to feripture and tradi¬ 
tion, innovations were the province of Cainites, while the 
defeendants of Seth adhered to the primitive and truly- 
patriarchal inftitutions. 
If thefe fuggeflions are allowed the merit of probabili¬ 
ty, we may juflly infer that the language of Noah, what¬ 
ever it was, differed very little from that of Adam, and. 
that, if it is pofiible to afcertain the language of the former;, 
that of the latter will of courfe be difeovered. And hence 
we (hall be enabled to trace the origin and antiquity of 
the Hebrew tongue ; and to fliow that it claims the ho¬ 
nour of being the original language of mankind. 
Whatever may have been the dialed of Noah and his 
family, that fame dialed, according to the Mofaic account, 
mull have obtained, without any alteration, till the era of 
the building of the tower of Babel. Upon this occafion a 
dreadful convullion took place; the language of mankind 
was confounded, and men were fcattered abroad upon the 
face of all the earth. 
How far this cataftrophe extended, is not the bufinefs 
of the prefent inquiry. See the word Dispersion, vol. v. 
p. S82. One thing is certain beyond all controverfy, 
namely, that the languages of all the nations which fet¬ 
tled near the centre of population were but flightly af¬ 
fected by its influence. Strabo has obferved, that three 
thoufand years after, the inhabitants of thofe countries ex¬ 
hibited a very ilrong refernblance of cognation, “in their 
language, manner of living, and the lineaments of their 
bodies. At the fame time he obferves, that the refem- 
blance in all thofe particulars was moft remarkable among 
the inhabitants of Mefopotamia.” 
It appears, then, that the languages of the Armenians, 
Syrians, Affyrians, Arabians, and probably of the Cha- 
naanim, did not fuffer materially by the confufion of 
tongues. This obfervation may alfo be extended to many 
of the dialeds fpoken by the people who fettled in thole 
countries not far diftant from the region where the facred 
hiftorian has fixed the original feat of mankind after the 
deluge^. 
