cratylus-第13章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



infinite　ages。　　Something　too　may　be　allowed　to　'the　persistency　of　the

strongest；'　to　'the　survival　of　the　fittest；'　in　this　as　in　the　other

realms　of　nature。



These　are　some　of　the　reflections　which　the　modern　philosophy　of　language

suggests　to　us　about　the　powers　of　the　human　mind　and　the　forces　and

influences　by　which　the　efforts　of　men　to　utter　articulate　sounds　were

inspired。　　Yet　in　making　these　and　similar　generalizations　we　may　note　also

dangers　to　which　we　are　exposed。　　（1）　There　is　the　confusion　of　ideas　with

factsof　mere　possibilities；　and　generalities；　and　modes　of　conception

with　actual　and　definite　knowledge。　　The　words　'evolution；'　'birth；'　'law；'

development；'　'instinct；'　'implicit；'　'explicit；'　and　the　like；　have　a

false　clearness　or　comprehensiveness；　which　adds　nothing　to　our　knowledge。　

The　metaphor　of　a　flower　or　a　tree；　or　some　other　work　of　nature　or　art；　is

often　in　like　manner　only　a　pleasing　picture。　　（2）　There　is　the　fallacy　of

resolving　the　languages　which　we　know　into　their　parts；　and　then　imagining

that　we　can　discover　the　nature　of　language　by　reconstructing　them。　　（3）

There　is　the　danger　of　identifying　language；　not　with　thoughts　but　with

ideas。　　（4）　There　is　the　error　of　supposing　that　the　analysis　of　grammar

and　logic　has　always　existed；　or　that　their　distinctions　were　familiar　to

Socrates　and　Plato。　　（5）　There　is　the　fallacy　of　exaggerating；　and　also　of

diminishing　the　interval　which　separates　articulate　from　inarticulate

languagethe　cries　of　animals　from　the　speech　of　manthe　instincts　of

animals　from　the　reason　of　man。　　（6）　There　is　the　danger　which　besets　all

enquiries　into　the　early　history　of　manof　interpreting　the　past　by　the

present；　and　of　substituting　the　definite　and　intelligible　for　the　true　but

dim　outline　which　is　the　horizon　of　human　knowledge。



The　greatest　light　is　thrown　upon　the　nature　of　language　by　analogy。　　We

have　the　analogy　of　the　cries　of　animals；　of　the　songs　of　birds　（'man；　like

the　nightingale；　is　a　singing　bird；　but　is　ever　binding　up　thoughts　with

musical　notes'）；　of　music；　of　children　learning　to　speak；　of　barbarous


nations　in　which　the　linguistic　instinct　is　still　undecayed；　of　ourselves

learning　to　think　and　speak　a　new　language；　of　the　deaf　and　dumb　who　have

words　without　sounds；　of　the　various　disorders　of　speech；　and　we　have　the

after…growth　of　mythology；　which；　like　language；　is　an　unconscious　creation

of　the　human　mind。　　We　can　observe　the　social　and　collective　instincts　of

animals；　and　may　remark　how；　when　domesticated；　they　have　the　power　of

understanding　but　not　of　speaking；　while　on　the　other　hand；　some　birds

which　are　comparatively　devoid　of　intelligence；　make　a　nearer　approach　to

articulate　speech。　　We　may　note　how　in　the　animals　there　is　a　want　of　that

sympathy　with　one　another　which　appears　to　be　the　soul　of　language。　　We　can

compare　the　use　of　speech　with　other　mental　and　bodily　operations；　for

speech　too　is　a　kind　of　gesture；　and　in　the　child　or　savage　accompanied

with　gesture。　　We　may　observe　that　the　child　learns　to　speak；　as　he　learns

to　walk　or　to　eat；　by　a　natural　impulse；　yet　in　either　case　not　without　a

power　of　imitation　which　is　also　natural　to　himhe　is　taught　to　read；　but

he　breaks　forth　spontaneously　in　speech。　　We　can　trace　the　impulse　to　bind

together　the　world　in　ideas　beginning　in　the　first　efforts　to　speak　and

culminating　in　philosophy。　　But　there　remains　an　element　which　cannot　be

explained；　or　even　adequately　described。　　We　can　understand　how　man　creates

or　constructs　consciously　and　by　design；　and　see；　if　we　do　not　understand；

how　nature；　by　a　law；　calls　into　being　an　organised　structure。　　But　the

intermediate　organism　which　stands　between　man　and　nature；　which　is　the

work　of　mind　yet　unconscious；　and　in　which　mind　and　matter　seem　to　meet；

and　mind　unperceived　to　herself　is　really　limited　by　all　other　minds；　is

neither　understood　nor　seen　by　us；　and　is　with　reluctance　admitted　to　be　a

fact。



Language　is　an　aspect　of　man；　of　nature；　and　of　nations；　the

transfiguration　of　the　world　in　thought；　the　meeting…point　of　the　physical

and　mental　sciences；　and　also　the　mirror　in　which　they　are　reflected；

present　at　every　moment　to　the　individual；　and　yet　having　a　sort　of　eternal

or　universal　nature。　　When　we　analyze　our　own　mental　processes；　we　find

words　everywhere　in　every　degree　of　clearness　and　consistency；　fading　away

in　dreams　and　more　like　pictures；　rapidly　succeeding　one　another　in　our

waking　thoughts；　attaining　a　greater　distinctness　and　consecutiveness　in

speech；　and　a　greater　still　in　writing；　taking　the　place　of　one　another

when　we　try　to　become　emancipated　from　their　influence。　　For　in　all

processes　of　the　mind　which　are　conscious　we　are　talking　to　ourselves；　the

attempt　to　think　without　words　is　a　mere　illusion；they　are　always

reappearing　when　we　fix　our　thoughts。　　And　speech　is　not　a　separate

faculty；　but　the　expression　of　all　our　faculties；　to　which　all　our　other

powers　of　expression；　signs；　looks；　gestures；　lend　their　aid；　of　which　the

instrument　is　not　the　tongue　only；　but　more　than　half　the　human　frame。



The　minds　of　men　are　sometimes　carried　on　to　think　of　their　lives　and　of

their　actions　as　links　in　a　chain　of　causes　and　effects　going　back　to　the

beginning　of　time。　　A　few　have　seemed　to　lose　the　sense　of　their　own

individuality　in　the　universal　cause　or　nature。　　In　like　manner　we　might

think　of　the　words　which　we　daily　use；　as　derived　from　the　first　speech　of

man；　and　of　all　the　languages　in　the　world；　as　the　expressions　or　varieties

of　a　single　force　or　life　of　language　of　which　the　thoughts　of　men　are　the

accident。　　Such　a　conception　enables　us　to　grasp　the　power　and　wonder　of

languages；　and　is　very　natural　to　the　scientific　philologist。　　For　he；　like

the　metaphysician；　believes　in　the　reality　of　that　which　absorbs　his　own

mind。　　Nor　do　we　deny　the　enormous　influence　which　language　has　exercised

over　thought。　　Fixed　words；　like　fixed　ideas；　have　often　governed　the

world。　　But　in　such　representations　we　attribute　to　language　too　much　the

nature　of　a　cause；　and　too　little　of　an　effect；too　much　of　an　absolute；

too　little　of　a　relative　character；too　much　of　an　ideal；　too　little　of　a

matter…of…fact　existence。



Or　again；　we　may　frame　a　single　abstract　notion　of　language　of　which　all

existent　languages　may　be　supposed　to　be　the　perversion。　　But　we　must　not

conceive　that　this　logical　figment　had　ever　a　real　existence；　or　is

anything　more　than　an　effort　of　the　mind　to　give　unity　to　infinitely

various　phenomena。　　There　is　no　abstract　language　'in　rerum　natura；'　any

more　than　there　is　an　abstract　tree；　but　only　languages　in　various　stages

of　growth；　maturity；　and　decay。　　Nor　do　other　logical　distinctions　or　even

grammatical　exactly　correspond　to　the　facts　of　language；　for　they　too　are

attempts　to　give　unity　and　regularity　to　a　subject　which　is　partly

irregular。



We　find；　however；　that　there　are　distinctions　of　another　kind　by　which　this

vast　field　of　language　admits　of　being　mapped　out。　　There　is　the

distinction　between　biliteral　and　triliteral　roots；　and　the　various

inflexions　which　accompany　them；　between　the　mere　mechanical　cohesion　of

sounds　or　words；　and　the　'chemical'　combination　of　them　into　a　new　word；

there　is　the　distinction　between　languages　which　have　had　a　free　and　full

development　of　their　organisms；　and　languages　which　have　been　stunted　in

their　growth；lamed　in　their　hands　or　feet；　and　never　able　to　acquire

afterwards　the　powers　in　which　they　are　deficient；　there　is　the　distinction

between　synthetical　languages　like　Greek　and　Latin；　which　have　retained

their　inflexions；　and　analytical　languages　like　English　or　French；　which

have　lost　them。　　Innumerable　as　are　the　languages　and　dialects　of　mankind；

there　are　comparatively　few　classes　to　which　they　can　be　referred。



Another　road　through　this　chaos　is　provided　by　the　physiology　of　speech。　

The　organs　of　language　are　t