276

ART. II.-Pasilogia: an Essay towards the Formation of a System of Universal Language, both written and vocal, with suggestions for its Dissemination throughout the World; including a succinct Review of the principal Systems of similar Character heretofore published. By the Rev. Edward Groves. Dublin: J. M'Glashan. 1846.

WHEN We survey the extent of modern languages, as given by Adelung and Balbi, we are wondrously struck with the idea that a medium by which at least the scientific of the earth could commune with each other might be devised. However unpopular it may seem to inculcate the dissolution of a variety of tongues from the rites, customs, manners, and associations connected with every language, it is undoubtedly eminently beneficial to a nation to be of one speech. We are amazingly struck with the annoyance caused by dialects, when we perceive over two hundred miles of the Gold Coast in Africa eight languages, three or four of which are unintelligible to the other natives of the same region. Anciently Britain presented a similar anomaly, and even now, with English, Irish, Scotch, Welsh, and Cornish (nearly obsolete), we certainly have a neat little imbroglio of our own. But how must Austria and Russia be affected, and to what injustice, amid the Slavonian nations under their sway, this confusion of tongues ministers, the readers of the New Quarterly cannot plead ignorance. It would indeed require a a high-souled ruler, like Mithridates, who understood twentytwo different tongues, to rule them. The Latin has long discharged the important office of the intercommunion of nations; but it is evidently not calculated to express many modern wants, nor is it attainable as an easy practicable medium by many perThe desideratum is a language of general symbols, and we quite agree with our author that considerable advances might be made by some such medium as that which was obtained by the current consent of the European nations, the adoption of our present common or Arabic system of notation. The ciphers, 5, 6, 8, &c., have a common mental representation in all the European nations, although the sound given to each varies amid all. The question then resolves itself into this:Can there be a cipher character throughout the earth? To this we reply, that algebra and the calculi exhibit the only visible approach to it, and that the conclusions thence established are triumphantly in favour of an affirmation to the proposition. Still many may

sons.

think that this would not lead to a simpler communication than the already acknowledged difficult intercommunion by the Latin. Let us then follow our author in a review of the opinions for and against the system.

Galen is the first authority given by him as expressing the wish, "that subjects could be treated without words."

Bacon has the following observations, which contain great good sense, and really touch the very elements of the question :

"It is now a well-known fact, that in China and the provinces of the farthest East, a kind of characters is in daily use which are real, not nominal, expressing not letters nor words, but things and notions; so that many nations, differing altogether in language, but agreeing in the use of these characters, communicate with one another by writing, insomuch that each can read, in his own language, any book written in such characters. These real characters are by no means hieroglyphical or emblematical, but altogether arbitrary, not less so than the elements of letters, being formed at pleasure and received into practice from habit by a kind of tacit compact. However, it is evident that a vast multitude of them is required in writing, for they must be as numerous as the radical words of a language. This portion, therefore, of the doctrine of the organ of speech, which treats of the notes or marks of things, is considered by us to be a desideratum." (p. 20.)

Bishop Wilkins is our next authority, and he testified the sincerity of his belief in this, if not in flying, by devising a system to effect it. Now many may think the worthy bishop somewhat impious in this effort; we confess we are not of that opinion, nor can we see why the presumption of the builders of Babel or Shinar should be visited everlastingly on the generations of men. If the curse on Ham is fast dying away, let us trust that on speech, under the divine influence of the Word, may follow. This prelate and the Bishop of Salisbury, Dr. Ward, both entertained the notion of the practicability of a universal language. The words used by the latter prelate are as just as they are forcible :

"When I first fell from that verbose way of tradition of the mathematics used by the antients, and of late by almost all, such as Clavius and the like, who have written huge volumes on particular subjects, into the symbolical way, invented by Vieta, advanced by Harriot, perfected by Oughtred and Des Cartes, I was presently extremely taken with it, finding by this means that not only the substance of those vast volumes might be brought into the compass of a sheet or two, but that the things thus reduced were more comprehensible and manageable, the labour of the brain much taken off, and a way laid open for invention and demonstration of infinite proposi

tions with more ease than before we could understand those which

others had invented for us. And I was put upon an earnest desire that the same course might be taken in other things. My first proposal was to find whether other things might not as well be defined by symbols; and herein I was presently resolved that symbols might be found for every thing and notion, so that an universal character might easily be made, wherein all nations might communicate together, just as they do in numbers and species. And to effect this is indeed the design of such as hitherto have done any thing concerning an universal character." (p. 22.)

Des Cartes had formed similar notions; but these we shall deduce hereafter.

Morhoff, in the Polyhistor published at Lubec, 1695, has the following important observations:

"However, that an invention of this kind is by no means impossible Beeman is very rightly of opinion, and he founds his judgment on the following grounds:-1. That chemical, astronomical, musical, and arithmetical characters are understood by all the nations of Europe, each of which speaks a language different from any of the others. 2. That the Chinese character is understood by the Coreans, Japanese, Tonquinese, and Cochin-Chinese, though they have not a common vocal language. 3. That all nations, however they differ in speech, agree in their conceptions of the subjects of discourse; if, therefore, they would agree also in the adoption of a character which would signify the things themselves, and our conceptions of them, and not words alone, it is evident that whatever was written in that character would be universally intelligible." (p. 24.)

Leibnitz, of all men, was the best calculated, possibly, to have brought out such a system in the early elements by his wondrous combinative powers. In reviewing two impracticable systems that had been proposed to effect this object, the difficulties that arose did not deter him; but we candidly own that it would require Leibnitzers to carry out his plan, as detailed in the extract we subjoin:

"I would venture to add one thing, which, if I were less burdened with business, or younger, or assisted by well-disposed young men, I would hope to accomplish, that is, to give a kind of spécieuse générale, in which all the truths of reason would be reduced to a form of calculation. It could be at the same time a kind of universal language or writing, but wholly different from all those which have been hitherto projected; for here the characters, and even the words, would direct the reason, and the errors, excepting those of fact, would be merely errors of calculation. It would be very difficult to form or invent this language or characteristic, but very easy to teach it without any dictionaries. It would serve, also, to estimate the degrees of

probability when there were not sufficient data to arrive at certain truths, and to discover what is wanting to supply it; and this mode of estimate would be of the greatest importance for the uses of life and for practical deliberations, in which, in balancing probabilities, we often miscalculate by more than one half." (p. 26.)

Amid Leibnitz's unpublished works there exists a plan for an alphabet of human thoughts, as introductory to a philosophical language. The work is in Latin, and the learned collator of his unpublished works has held out hopes that it will soon see the light.

on

The "Journal Litéraire" for 1720 contained an article " universal language." It was in a review of a dialogue on the subject which had fallen into their hands, in which the author proposed to make the nine arabic numerals the base of it. The system is given by our author, and is extremely ingenious.

Fontenelle, in his eloge on Leibnitz, states that he condemned the systems of Wilkins and Dalgarno, and thought that they had not discovered the real character, and that the algebraic basis was the only true one.

The "Encyclopédie" noticed the subject, but did not add much to previous researches. Monboddo favoured the notions of Bishop Wilkins, and certainly with some justice. Dugald Stuart, Abel Remusat, Murr, and others, all mighty names, seem to have considered the subject worthy of their deepest attention.

Michaelis is wholly opposed, however, to this notion, and has, at great length, delivered his strong protest against it, for which we refer our readers to the work before us, where his objections are given at length, and their complete refutation attempted. Some of the objections of Michaelis are extremely ingenious. He objects to the number of characters required; but here the argument is met by the fact, that if one word bear various significations, so may one symbol. Symbols also, we know, present more advantages than words for extensive signification. He again urges, that the sounds of the language will appear to all nations equally foreign, also the difficulties of pronouncing it, and that it is not by use but by artificial instruction that we are to master it. But this latter objection applies to a great extent in the acquisition of any foreign tongue. He further points out that a learned language would be devoid of those sionate expressions which excite deep interest, and give light and beauty to it. To this it is not enough, we think, to say with our author, that the language of reason is bereft of passion, which he considers a satisfactory reply. The universal language must be one into which man enters in all the faculties of his

pas

being; and we do not see how histories and other works could be given in it, independent of the treatment of the passions. We do not think that this objection of Michaelis is a fair one; we can see no reason why a mathematical love-letter should not be written, and feel fully assured that the language of analysis is of eminent utility to the illustrations of the theologian.

We shall now enter on a brief review of the systems of universal language already published. Amid the first of these is the imperfect scheme of Schott: this takes the numerals for the basis, and is merely a written language, although it can be made oral by taking any one language out of the mass as the type. It is, however, too loose in classification of terms to admit of high practical utility.

The second is by an anonymous Frenchman, and is principally curious for eliciting the following opinions from Des Cartes. After condemning the scheme before him, he adds,

"I think, however, that to this invention another could be added, as well for the formation of the primitive words of the language as for their characters, so that it could be learned in a very short time, which could be done by means of order; that is to say, by establishing an order among all the thoughts which enter into the human mind, as has been naturally established in the science of arithmetic; so that as all numbers to infinity can be learned in a day, so as to name and write them in an unknown language, though they form an infinite number of different words, the same might be done with all the other words necessary to express every other idea which it enters into the heart of man to conceive. If this could be done, I doubt not that such a language would soon spread through the world; for there are few men who would not willingly employ five or six days to enable themselves to be understood by the whole world." (p. 61.)

The system of our countryman, Mr. Cave Beck, is far too complicated for adoption, and Dr. Becher's is in too rude a state to review with any benefit: it partook more of the character of cipher correspondence than what is required.

Dalgarno, however, a native of Scotland, attracted great attention to his method, and was fortunate enough to secure the recommendation of Charles II. by royal letter. He rejects the Arabic numerals, and adheres to letters only. His reputation as one of the first philologists of his day attracted notice to his system. It did not, however, obtain beyond his time any repute; but the system of Athanasius Kircher appears to have been highly prized, and held long as a state secret. His title-page is of high pretension, for in it he declares that any one, however unacquainted with languages, can be taught by it to correspond openly and secretly, clearly and obscurely, with persons of every