LANGUAGE. 
tion in the plan, the monftrous mixture of the gods of an¬ 
tiquity with the faints of Chriflianity, and the fcanty and 
sli-balanced flock of perfonages who have not the heroic 
mould which poetry requires ; all contribute to give it the 
rank of a poetic relation, rather than that of a true epopea. 
The literature of Portugal may be faid to commence with 
Deniz, the fixth fovereign, who cultivated poetry and the 
belles lettres, and founded the univerfityof Coimbra. In 
his reign lived Vafco Lobeira, who is faid to have been 
the original author of that famous romance Amadis de 
Gaul. In more recent times, Saa da Miranda has ac¬ 
quired reputation in paftoral poetry. The chief hifto- 
rians are, Joao de Barros, Fr. Luiz de Soufa, Fr. Bernardo 
de Brito Vieira, Oforio bifhop of Sylves, Duarte Ribeiro 
ide Macedo, the venerable Bartholomeo do Quartal, and 
the count de Ericeira. Among the poets are celebrated 
Camoens, Digo Bernardes, Antonio Barboza, Bacelar, 
and Gabriel Pereira; two dramatic writers are alfo men¬ 
tioned, Vicente Antonio Jofephar, vvhofe plays are pub- 
lilhed in four volumes; and Nicola Luis, called the Por- 
tuguefe Plautus. In mathematics, Pedro Nunez diftin- 
guifhed himfelf at the beginning of the fixteenth century. 
Of late years natural hiftory begins to be a little ftudied : 
but Portugal is the laft of nations in that department. 
This language is fpoken on all the coafts of Africa and 
Alia, as far as China, but mixed with the languages of 
the feveral nations in thofe dillant regions. 
That the Italian tongue is derived from the vulgar 
language of the ancient Romans, feems the opinion of 
the bell critics ; but to difcover and point out by what 
degrees it was fmoothed and polifhed to the Hate in which 
Dante, Petrarch, and Bocaccio, found it in the fourteenth 
century, would require more time, and occupy more 
fpace, than the fubject feems necelfarily to deferve. How¬ 
ever, as the Italian language has been truly called by 
Mctallatio tnuf.ca Jlejfa, and is fo favourable to vocal pur- 
pofes as to be more mufical in itfelf, u’hen merely fpoken 
with purity, than any other in Europe, an inquiry into the 
caufes of its mellifluence and natural melody does not 
feem foreign to a hiftory of language in general. Mura- 
tori has given innumerable palfages, from authors of the 
eighth and ninth centuries, to prove, that, after the Franks 
and Germans were fettled in Italy, articles were ufed in 
the Latin language, inftead of pronouns and changes of 
termination, in order to fave the trouble of inflecting the 
cafes of nouns; but pretends not to fay what this vulgar 
language was, or whether the clergy preached to the com¬ 
mon people, or merchants carried on their correfpondence, 
in Latin or Italian. 
The learned Maffei allows the Provencal, French, Spa- 
ni£h, and Italian, languages to be defendants from the 
Latin ; but denies that the ancient inhabitants of Italy 
adopted any words from the Goths or Huns who invaded 
them. The genius of the German, Francic, or Teutonic, 
language, which was fpoken by the Lombards, was fo dia¬ 
metrically oppofite to that of the Italians, that it feems 
incredible there lhould have been any exchange or union 
of dialefts between them : the one being as remarkable 
for its numerous confonants and harlh terminations, as 
the other for its open vowels and mellifluous endings. 
As it is the opinion of this profound critic that the Ro¬ 
mans had always a vulgar dialed, lefs grammatical and 
elegant than that of the fenate and books, he fuppofes 
the French, Spanifh, and Italian, languages, to have been 
different modifications of this ruftic plebeian dialed. 
But it is as difficult to affign a reafon for all thele daugh¬ 
ters of one common mother being fo diffimilar, as it is to 
account for the little refemblance that is frequently found 
between other children of the fame parents. And why 
the French language lhould have fo many nafal endings; 
the Spanifh fo many Affiliating, and the Italian alone have 
none but vocal, terminations, can only have been occafi- 
oned by fome particular and radical tendency in the vul¬ 
gar and plebeian language of each country, from very 
high antiquity. The Romans had two words for moll 
Vol, XII. No. 821. 
189 
purpofes : the one elegant, and ufed by writers and per- 
fons of education, and the other vulgar and common. 
The word caput, for inftance, was a claffical term for the 
head ; and tejla, ufed by Aufonius, an ignoble expreffion 
for the fame thing. Os, the mouth, according to Plautus 
and Juvenal, was called bucca by the common people ; 
whence the word bocca in Italian. Equus, a horfe, accord¬ 
ing to Horace and Perfius, was called caballus and cabillinus 
by the plebeians, which the Italians have foftened into 
cavallo. The learned author has collefled a great number 
of proofs in confirmation of his opinion that the Romans 
had at all times two languages; the one elegant, gram¬ 
matical, and ufed by the patricians and the learned ; and 
the other mean, vulgar, inaccurate, and ufed only by the 
plebeians. That this vulgar language, rather than the 
pure Latin, was the parent of the Provencal, French, Spa- 
nifli, and Italian, languages, appears by the examples he 
has furnilhed ; but the Italian was not only derived from 
the trivial and vulgar words in the Latin language, but 
from grammatical folecifms and popular inaccuracies of 
pronunciation. It is not to be imagined that the common 
people of Rome at any period fpoke fuch correft and ele¬ 
gant language as their belt authors have left us in their 
writings. Ever eager to convey their meaning, and to 
arrive at the true end of fpeech by the fliorteft road, they 
dilliked the trouble of polyfyllables, and had a natural 
propenfity to abbreviate them. Of this Maffei has fur¬ 
nilhed innumerable examples in the Latin language of 
very high antiquity : as ,Jis for Ji vis, ain for aifne, fi re nipfe 
io\-Jimilis re ipfa, and cduneas for cave ne eas. But elilions 
of confonants were ftill more frequent: as, per hoc was 
foftened into pero, Jic into f ; and by the omilfion of the 
m final in the accul'ative cafe Angular of nouns, as amore 
for amorem,fama for Jamem, See. Thus innumerable words 
in the Latin language infenlibly became Italian ; and, as 
it was impoffible for the common people, ignorant of 
grammar, to know all the neceffary inflections of nouns, 
it was natural for them to take greater liberties with the 
accufative and ablative cafes than any other; and it is 
from thefe two cafes that the genius of the Italian lan¬ 
guage is chiefly derived. The learned marquis goes 
through all the cafes of nouns and tenfes of verbs ; Ihows 
the formation of adverbs, and the mutation of letters, ia 
order to remove harlhnefs and facilitate utterance. And 
it appears that the Roman foldiers and common people to¬ 
tally loft the terminations um, ur, and us, which rendered 
the article neceffary to diltinguifli cafes, numbers, and 
perfons, as well as auxiliary verbs to facilitate the conju¬ 
gations of other verbs. 
It was the opinion of Muratori, that thefe changes or 
corruptions were occafioned by the barbarians who in¬ 
vaded Italy ; but both Maffei and Severino have proved 
that the Romans had introduced them long before the 
Goths, Franks, or Vandals, had invaded them. This 
language continued to partake of its barbarous origin, re¬ 
maining rude, unformed, and without rules, as long as 
the ufe of Latin was preferved in courts of juftice, pub¬ 
lic afls, and polite converfation ; and it was not till the 
twelfth century that the Mules honoured the vulgar lan¬ 
guage of Italy fo far as to admit it into their company. 
The fupenority of tha Tufcan dialed over all the 
others of Italy is aferibed by Gravina to the ancient de¬ 
mocratic form of government at Florence, which, before 
the Medici family had ufurped the fovereignty, furnilhed 
the citizens with frequent opportunities of fpeaking in 
public, and encQuragement for polifliing this language, 
“ in order to bring the people over to their opinions, by 
the fweetnefs of their eloquence.” 
That every language of a learned and commercial peo¬ 
ple is greatly changed in the courfe of a few centuries, is 
well known. Horace complains of the want of perma¬ 
nence in that of the Romans, Quintilian tells us that in 
his time fcarcely any of the ancient language was left; 
and in the time of Juftinian new inflexions and modes of 
fpeech, negled of lyntax, abbreviations, and vulgar bar- 
3 C bar ffins. 
