277

CHAPTER XXII.

THE PRIMEVAL LANGUAGE.

It is impossible to discover what was the structure and grammar of the primeval language, but there is something in the nature and character of the Hebrew which has induced many profound thinkers, as well as great scholars, to believe that, or a language of similar formation, the language first uttered. As Max Müller observes, it seems to be the production of an individual mind; a rational design runs through its whole formation. If, as some assert, it is unfit for the use of a speculative philosophy, it is so only because it is so perfectly adapted to express what is positive in relation to nature and to man. Since it is so completely in keeping with the nature of things as to be fully equal to the expression of all known qualities of mind and matter, it looks as if formed on scientific principles. No language can possibly be more simple, and yet none can be more comprehensive. While capable of expressing all conditions of things, it is also peculiarly adapted to express thought as well as emotion. It is evidently built up, shaped, adjusted, and regulated in a manner that could not possibly be unintentional or accidental.

All its native roots are formed of three consonants, with their inherent vowels, making two syllables, a fact in itself strongly indicative of design. Oken observes, in his usual oracular manner, that the most perfect language is that in which the consonants always hold their own vowels as space does time, never allowing the utterance of a vowel without a consonant.' Judged of according to this principle, the Hebrew is the paragon of tongues, since it not only excludes the utterance of a vowel without a consonant, but by the vowels also expresses the grammatical and local relation of each word in a sentence. Thus, Hebrew is in thorough contrast with the speech of savages, in which detached vowels always abound, seemingly for the very reason that a vowel standing alone is an inarticulate sound, caught, as if without effort, to utter feeling without thought, as with brutes. Of all Semitic tongues the grammatical structure of the Hebrew is clearly the most ancient. Hence, of many forms the origin is still visible in Hebrew, whilst all traces of it are effaced in the sister dialects.'† 'A great number of Semitish roots are found also in the languages of the Indo-Germanic stock.' The affinity between Semitish and Indo-Germanic roots has been fully exhibited in the Latin edition of Gesenius' Hebrew Lexicon.' Thus the extreme anti

quity of Hebrew asserts itself.

It is a remarkable circumstance that the Hebrew has no

* Physio-Philosophy, § 2899.

† Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar, Introduction.

Ibid.

material adjectives, and that one noun so often qualifies another; thus, a holy place is in Hebrew a place of holiness. Hence we see also that there must be an abstract idea connected with every noun as well as verb in the language. Hence, too, we perceive how perfectly this language is adapted for metaphorical expression, while at the same time the structure of the language seems to preclude the notion that it could have resulted from mere imitation of natural sounds, because every word has an abstract idea included in it. The nouns or

names of things and persons are all expressive of ideas conveying thought; thus, the word expressing sin also implies loss as well as expiation; that expressing darkness signifies also deprivation. In fact, there is no language so apt for naming, and therefore none more likely to be primitive.

No existing language has borrowed so little or yielded so much, most of its radicals being found in other oriental tongues, which may, with the Hebrew, have been derived from some anterior source common to all, but which the Hebrew has evidently not derived from them, and which they may possibly have obtained from the Hebrew. Whatever its origin, it is certain that things and facts of life with all divine thoughts are more easily, succinctly, clearly, and forcibly expressed in this tongue than any other. This fact, at least, however accounted for, is patent to the world. Hebrew has been chosen by Providence as the vehicle of the sublimest ideas which man has ever conceived, concerning the relation of man to the Divine existence, the nature

of moral law, true repentance, the fall of man and his recovery. This fact is sufficiently demonstrative of its fitness for the purpose, seeing that the thoughts contained in the one Hebrew book, the Bible, are the basis of the highest forms of thought, of civilisation, and theology, the world has ever known. This circumstance alone would go far to warrant the ancient presumption that Hebrew was the language in which mankind were first taught the connection between all knowledge and religious truth.

The instruction contained in the Old Testament is more readily and naturally transferred into every other tongue, than is possible by translation from any classic language; and the Hebrew being unencumbered with expletives and direct in its construction, its simple grandeur is best evinced when most literally rendered, as we have it in our own mother tongue, the English Old Testament being the best treasury of thoughts and words in our language, and for majesty of diction, pathos, poetry, and strength of utterance, the noblest book in any tongue. As Addison says, 'Our language has received innumerable elegancies and improvements from that infusion of Hebraisms which are derived to it out of Holy Writ, that give force and energy to our expressions, warm and animate our language, and convey our thoughts in more ardent and intense phrases than to be met with in our own tongue.' any

律

Farrar, in his earnest and eloquent defence of the theory

*Spectator No. 405.

which attributes the origin of language to mere imitation of nature's inarticulate sounds by man, boldly asserts that the Hebrew tongue is altogether an onomatopoeia.* But if onomatopoeia be the ground out of which all the roots and stems of language have grown, the fact that so many Hebrew words are supposed traceable directly to that source, would go far to prove that Hebrew was the first language. And, on the other hand, if for other reasons Hebrew can be shown to possess evidence of its primeval origin, then it would follow that onomatopoeia was the origin of human speech. But, in fact, however imitation of natural sounds and voices may have contributed to diversify the stock of words, there is no evidence to show that the most familiar names of things, and their relations, could have originated in this manner. And, moreover, the almost invariable construction of Hebrew words by the union of three consonants to form two syllables, each of which seems to have possessed originally a distinct significance, is entirely against the notion that the language originated in imitation, but would rather imply that the power of the human voice-organs to form syllables was the ground of the language.

That Hebrew was the primitive language seems to be assumed in the Hebrew Scriptures, since the reason assigned why the first mother was called Eve, and why both the first man and the first woman were called Adam, is found in the Hebrew meaning of these names.

* Chapters on Language, chap. xiv.

Of