X.

DIVERSITY OF TONGUES.

Origin of

language.

WHATEVER may have been the origin of human language-whether the first created were endowed with the gift of speech, or, as seems more probable, language is the slow growth of centuries-there must have been a time when the human family was of one language and one speech. We know no argument in favor of the first theory. It is a mere assumption based on the fact that man is gifted above other animals and that he has need of speech. The other theory, namely, that language is a growth, is capable in good degree of demonstration.

Place a group of animals together, and they soon come to understand each other in a sort of

rude yet decisive way. Much more, two human beings, though they be of different races and different tongues, will soon communicate their sentiments. and ideas to each other by articulate sounds.*

* Peschel states that young children of some South African tribes, left much to themselves during the long absence of parents in collecting their winter's food, develop a sort of language of their own.

The process is a very simple one.

Growth

of

If we go

back to the history of the infant race,

we may suppose the first attempt to language. have been nothing more than a vocal impulse, having no intelligent design or intelligible meaning, but growing out of the desire for expression. Nevertheless, when found to answer a purpose, or procure some satisfactory response, it would be repeated and so grow into, a habit, which would widen and extend till it comprehended a variety of sounds, each of which would have some special meaning. The same process would go on in different individuals at the same time. Each would learn to accept or imitate the other's utterances, as expressing certain ideas; and each contributing a share to the common stock, a single language would grow up and be mutually adopted.* Thus a community of people, living in the same place and in like conditions, would have one language and one speech. long as they continued one community, with no great variety of interests and no great diversity of aims, they would continue in the same. habits of life, thought, and speech. We see this

One language

at first.

And so

The theory that language is a human invention need not disturb the equanimity of the most reverent believer in the Scriptures; for it is distinctly stated (Genesis ii. 19, 20) that man gave names to the animals. They had no names till he invented and applied them

well illustrated in the unenterprising lands of the Orient, where customs of life and habit, and fashions in dress even, remain almost the same as they were thousands of years ago, though the influx and mingling of foreign elements have somewhat corrupted and changed their speech. So long as society undergoes no great changes, so long the language will undergo no important modifications. But when the first begins to change the other will soon follow, and from causes in no wise difficult to

trace.

Causes

of

diversity.

So long as a community is small and devoted largely to a common pursuit, so long there is little occasion or opportunity for change. But history and experience alike go to prove, that as a community enlarges, as its numbers increase and its business interests multiply, and especially as men of courage and ambition strike out from the old home, emigrate and lead out colonies to form new communities, as Abraham started out from Ur of the Chaldees, and Lot separated from his kinsman at the Jordan, different habits grow up and differences of speech will soon appear.

Although facilities of travel and com- Illustrations. munication make these things less appar

ent now, it is but a few years since this fact was well illustrated in our own country. We are an

English-speaking nation. And yet, a generation since, a person bred in New England found it difficult to understand a Southerner, on first acquaintance, and they of the West were quite perplexed over some peculiarities of speech of newly arrived New England neighbors.

Not only does remoteness of locality and infrequency of communication contribute to this result, but it is inevitable, as a community extends and trades and occupations increase in variety, that these differences should arise. Locality, kinds of business and habits of life must all be taken into the account. And these differences will multiply in number and widen in extent, till after a few years, people who started in life together but have been separated, will sometimes be at a loss to understand each other. In the gold mines of California a dialect grew up quite incomprehensible to one who had no knowledge of their modes of life. It is related that when Chatham, on one occasion, visited the mines of Yorkshire, he was surprised to find he could not understand at all the coal digger's speech; and, on the other hand, the statesman's polished rhetoric was but idle words in the ears of these men of brawny arm but narrow opportunities.

A consideration of much importance in this connection is that language in remote ages was unwritten, and so took no more permanent form

Rapid changes of unwritten

than that which was given it in passing from lip to lip. A missionary on revisiting a tribe of Indians after an absence of ten years, found their language so changed in that brief period, he had to learn it almost anew.

language.

And

a traveller in Brazil relates that his guides, from different portions of the same tribe, had marked differences of accent and inflection.

The pen and printing press now give to words some legible and lasting form, and therefore changes must be less rapid than in the early history of the race. But in dealing with the origin of language, and its earliest development, we must take into account the conditions of human life in its earliest period.

Now, on the theory that the human race had a common origin, or if not that we deal with the historic portion, it is plain that at first and for a considerable period, they must have been of one language and speech. So much is clearly deducible from what we know of human society, and from the similarities that can be traced between all or most of the leading languages of the earth. For unity or affinity of language is conceded to imply unity of origin, near or remote.

* Mr. Henry Welsford, in his "Mithridates Minor: an Essay on Language" (London, 1848), assumes that unwritten languages change least; but recent observations do not bear out the statement.