Dialogue

  1 Craty|    century B.C., on the nature of language been preserved to us; or
  2 Craty|       beginning to be asked about language which were parallel to other
  3 Craty|        beginnings of the study of language we know little, and there
  4 Craty|       Socrates. For the theory of language can only be propounded by
  5 Craty|           the ancients respecting language put together.~The dialogue
  6 Craty|        the conventional theory of language, which he acknowledges to
  7 Craty|           to imply that a perfect language can only be based on his
  8 Craty|      relation does his account of language stand to the rest of his
  9 Craty|   Cratylus, the three theories of language which are respectively maintained
 10 Craty|     whether applied to society or language, explains everything and
 11 Craty|       Hermogenes that his view of language is only a part of a sophistical
 12 Craty|    theorizers about the origin of language). He is at once a philosopher
 13 Craty|         for while wanting to rest language on an immutable basis, he
 14 Craty|          to derive all truth from language, and in language he sees
 15 Craty|       truth from language, and in language he sees reflected the philosophy
 16 Craty|      manner the union of the two. Language is conventional and also
 17 Craty|      accidental or exceptional in language. Some words have had their
 18 Craty|       combine in the formation of language. And the three views respectively
 19 Craty|         that ‘the legislator made language with the dialectician standing
 20 Craty|        regarded as the creator of language, according to Hellenic notions,
 21 Craty|          approaching the subject, language, like virtue in the Republic,
 22 Craty|         to express generally that language is the product of intelligence,
 23 Craty|            A better conception of language could not have been formed
 24 Craty|           bring Plato’s theory of language into accordance with the
 25 Craty|          the nature and origin of language, in which Adam Smith, Rousseau,
 26 Craty|            that Plato’s theory of language is not inconsistent with
 27 Craty|          age in his conception of language, as much as he is in his
 28 Craty|           rational explanation of language. Still he preserves his ‘
 29 Craty|           Onomatopoetic theory of language; that is to say, he supposes
 30 Craty|          construction of an ideal language. Or that he has any Eleatic
 31 Craty|           Cratylus.~The theory of language which is propounded in the
 32 Craty|          to receive our theory of language.~There remains a difficulty
 33 Craty|         illustrate a principle of language as well as a true one: 3.
 34 Craty|         age: 4. the philosophy of language had not made such progress
 35 Craty|      lecture on the philosophy of language, Socrates is also satirizing
 36 Craty|        the Heracleitean theory of language.~In the latter part of the
 37 Craty|           application not only to language but to knowledge generally;
 38 Craty|        the relation of thought to language is omitted here, but is
 39 Craty|        you must remember that all language is in process of change;
 40 Craty|        picture or figure—that is, language—is completed. Not that I
 41 Craty|         which the ancients framed language. And this leads me to consider
 42 Craty|          the most perfect form of language is found only where there
 43 Craty|           then, why, Socrates, is language so consistent? all words
 44 Craty|       doubt that the inventors of language gave names, under the idea
 45 Craty| discovered the true principles of language, and then (II) proceed to
 46 Craty|          the origin and nature of language with the anticipations of
 47 Craty|            1) Plato is aware that language is not the work of chance;
 48 Craty|           But he has no idea that language is a natural organism. He
 49 Craty| theologian would have proved that language must have had a divine origin,
 50 Craty|          account of the origin of language ‘as an excuse for not giving
 51 Craty|        design and art enters into language. The creative power abating
 52 Craty|        say that the nobler use of language only begins when the frame-work
 53 Craty|          improver of the forms of language. He is the poet or maker
 54 Craty|           formative principles of language, when they have passed their
 55 Craty|          the decaying instinct of language, by rule and method, which
 56 Craty|           was acquainted with any language but Greek. Yet he has conceived
 57 Craty|           meaning. The framers of language were aware of this; they
 58 Craty|        insight into the nature of language. He does not expressively
 59 Craty|       indicating his meaning. And language is the gesture of the tongue;
 60 Craty|         step in the physiology of language. He was probably the first
 61 Craty|          the first who said that ‘language is imitative sound,’ which
 62 Craty|           distinctly affirms that language is not truth, or ‘philosophie
 63 Craty|        the flux of Heracleitus in language. But he is covertly satirising
 64 Craty|       conjugates, correlatives of language have anything corresponding
 65 Craty|         philosophical analysis of language teaches us is, that we should
 66 Craty|           that we should be above language, making words our servants,
 67 Craty|           like those of a foreign language, he is willing to admit
 68 Craty|    changing;—not the inventors of language, but writing and speaking,
 69 Craty|           and other subtleties of language escaped the observation
 70 Craty|           nor does he conceive of language as the joint work of the
 71 Craty|    charged with a desire to frame language on artificial principles.
 72 Craty|           technical or scientific language, in words which should have
 73 Craty|          Plato than there is of a language corresponding to the ideas;
 74 Craty|          could the want of such a language be felt until the sciences
 75 Craty|      essential characteristics of language. The great master has shown
 76 Craty|       conservative of the ancient language, loved the letters iota
 77 Craty|         to the furthest point, in language as in all the other creations
 78 Craty|         the most perfect state of language.’ These words suggest a
 79 Craty|       interest than the origin of language; viz. what is the ideal
 80 Craty|         viz. what is the ideal of language, how far by any correction
 81 Craty|       contain deeper truths about language than any other ancient writing.
 82 Craty|          the origin and nature of language? Like other modern metaphysical
 83 Craty|          There are more things in language than the human mind easily
 84 Craty|          account of the origin of language.~Speaking is one of the
 85 Craty|         uttered by a child in any language. Yet into the formation
 86 Craty|         been transmitted from one language to another; like the child
 87 Craty|           as well as speakers did language begin. Not the interjection
 88 Craty|          stage in the progress of language was accompanied by some
 89 Craty|         of dialects passed into a language. Then arose poetry and literature.
 90 Craty|          with each improvement of language the powers of the human
 91 Craty|        refined into a notion; how language, fair and large and free,
 92 Craty|       this or any other theory of language is proved by facts. It is
 93 Craty|          Only we seem to see that language is as much the creation
 94 Craty|          In the later analysis of language, we trace the opposite and
 95 Craty|         categories. So complex is language, and so expressive not only
 96 Craty|          the modern philosophy of language suggests to us about the
 97 Craty|        can discover the nature of language by reconstructing them. (
 98 Craty|         the danger of identifying language, not with thoughts but with
 99 Craty|      articulate from inarticulate language—the cries of animals from
100 Craty|         thrown upon the nature of language by analogy. We have the
101 Craty|          to think and speak a new language, of the deaf and dumb who
102 Craty|         of mythology, which, like language, is an unconscious creation
103 Craty|         appears to be the soul of language. We can compare the use
104 Craty| reluctance admitted to be a fact.~Language is an aspect of man, of
105 Craty|           single force or life of language of which the thoughts of
106 Craty|          enormous influence which language has exercised over thought.
107 Craty|   representations we attribute to language too much the nature of a
108 Craty|         single abstract notion of language of which all existent languages
109 Craty|   phenomena. There is no abstract language ‘in rerum natura,’ any more
110 Craty|        correspond to the facts of language; for they too are attempts
111 Craty|          which this vast field of language admits of being mapped out.
112 Craty|          of speech. The organs of language are the same in all mankind,
113 Craty|       speaking.~Whether we regard language from the psychological,
114 Craty|           secret of the origin of language, which, like some of the
115 Craty|        Lectures on the Science of Language;’ Steinthal, ‘Einleitung
116 Craty|            the inner structure of language has been laid bare; the
117 Craty|   literary or principal form of a language is better understood. Many
118 Craty|           no longer confused with language, nor the anatomy of words
119 Craty|          stripped off; and we see language more as it truly was. The
120 Craty|           philology calls up.~(1) Language seems to be composite, but
121 Craty|          up the existing forms of language into their parts he will
122 Craty|        primitive form or forms of language known to us, or to be reasonably
123 Craty|       inference can be drawn from language, either for or against the
124 Craty|         when applied to primitive language, it is probable that the
125 Craty|           that the later stage of language is the result rather of
126 Craty|       consonants. But who gave to language these primeval laws; or
127 Craty|          in others; or why in one language there is a greater development
128 Craty|           period every variety of language may have been in process
129 Craty|         any traces of an original language still survive, any more
130 Craty|      fancies—to whom the whole of language might in truth be said to
131 Craty|       quickly ran through a whole language. For like the other gifts
132 Craty|          we know of the origin of language that the real scholar is
133 Craty|           a primitive or original language which it is time to leave
134 Craty|           imported from a foreign language, and the like, in which
135 Craty|   precisely the same. The laws of language are invariable, but no two
136 Craty|           be still in dispute. Is language conscious or unconscious?
137 Craty|         many things in the use of language which may be observed from
138 Craty|           be our consciousness of language is really only the analysis
139 Craty|        degree to the formation of language. ‘Which of us by taking
140 Craty|      least of the causes by which language is affected, and is likely
141 Craty|        from the mental element of language; they are really inseparable—
142 Craty|           the lesser varieties of language which arise out of the many
143 Craty|      question whether the laws of language, like the other laws of
144 Craty|        superficial appearances of language, as of nature, are irregular,
145 Craty|       comparison of the growth of language in the individual and in
146 Craty|      hereditary or paternity of a language, we must remember that the
147 Craty|      invention and improvement of language to the conscious action
148 Craty|  influence worth speaking of on a language: such a view is said to
149 Craty|           that whether applied to language or to other branches of
150 Craty|          much to the knowledge of language. But if he means that the
151 Craty|   uniformly true. For the laws of language are precarious, and can
152 Craty|     principal cause of changes in language, but only one among many,
153 Craty|      incumbrances or illusions of language may be reckoned many of
154 Craty|           erroneous conception of language: for it reduces to a system
155 Craty|           bring an earlier use of language into conformity with the
156 Craty|    anatomy, not the physiology of language, which grammar seeks to
157 Craty|         of the last of the three. Language is a thing of degrees and
158 Craty|        ties it up in fixed rules. Language has many varieties of usage:
159 Craty|        subject to law, and that a language which had no exceptions
160 Craty|           the influences by which language is ordinarily affected.
161 Craty|           grammar introduces into language. We are not considering
162 Craty|         there are three stages of language: (1) in which things were
163 Craty|           existed in early times. Language cannot be explained by Metaphysics;
164 Craty|         and other to be latent in language at a time when in their
165 Craty|    progress.~(4) Our knowledge of language is almost confined to languages
166 Craty|        full rights and dignity of language when they acquire the use
167 Craty|         or occupation. The common language sometimes reacts upon the
168 Craty|   literary character. The laws of language can be best discerned in
169 Craty|  discerned in the great crises of language, especially in the transitions
170 Craty|     slowly found a resting-place. Language would be the greatest of
171 Craty|         to observe our own use of language in conversation or in writing,
172 Craty|          may compare with our own language some other, even when we
173 Craty|          the inherent strength of language, which like ‘a mountain
174 Craty|          the argot of Paris (that language of suffering and crime,
175 Craty|    chiefly useful in showing what language is not. The study of any
176 Craty|          The study of any foreign language may be made also a study
177 Craty|         in the history of our own language as of any other. A few well-selected
178 Craty|           into the true nature of language.~(6) Thus far we have been
179 Craty|    endeavouring to strip off from language the false appearances in
180 Craty|          of all the principles of language, common also to the animals,
181 Craty|      rudimentary, half-articulate language, the cry or song or speech
182 Craty|        the power is in the use of language than in any other process
183 Craty|    provided the first material of language: but it was ‘without form
184 Craty|          between what we now call language and the cry of a bird or
185 Craty|          or animal. Speech before language was a rudis indigestaque
186 Craty|     suppose that the analogies of language are always uniform: there
187 Craty|  therefore too deeply imbedded in language entirely to drop out. The
188 Craty|           are seldom known to us.~Language, like the animal and vegetable
189 Craty|           of things. Gradually in language they arrange themselves
190 Craty|         by side. The fertility of language produces many more than
191 Craty|           perfected, though in no language did they completely perfect
192 Craty|        for the intelligibility of language. So not without admixture
193 Craty|           words, a lower stage of language passes into a higher. Thus
194 Craty|         in all the vast domain of language, there is no answer to the
195 Craty|       analogy permeates, not only language, but the whole world, both
196 Craty|          to grasp the infinity of language either under the figure
197 Craty|       analogy in the formation of language or even prior to it comes
198 Craty|   disappeared; but in no stage of language is it entirely lost. It
199 Craty|          belongs chiefly to early language, in which words were few;
200 Craty|           onomatopea of primitive language was refined into an onomatopea
201 Craty|         in all the higher uses of language the sound is the echo of
202 Craty|    further that no explanation of language consistently corresponds
203 Craty|      great may be the light which language throws upon the nature of
204 Craty|        joiner’s work,—a theory of language which is more and more refuted
205 Craty|       course of ages. The poet of language cannot put in and pull out
206 Craty|           stage of the history of language ceases to act upon individual
207 Craty|           pronunciation or use of language. Yet no one observes the
208 Craty|          hand, the necessities of language seem to require that the
209 Craty|         into the vacant spaces of language and retire when they are
210 Craty|        they are no longer needed. Language equally abhors vacancy and
211 Craty|             7) We have shown that language, although subject to laws,
212 Craty|          briefly of the faults of language. They may be compared to
213 Craty|          them can be given. So in language there are the cross influences
214 Craty|          the more common usage of language. The subtlety of nature
215 Craty|           the first principles of language is possible and may be defended.~
216 Craty|     defended.~The imperfection of language is really due to the formation
217 Craty|           comprehend the whole of language, was constrained to ‘supplement
218 Craty|           are two ways in which a language may attain permanence or
219 Craty|          or the greater part of a language is literally preserved;
220 Craty|        nation. In either case the language which is familiarly spoken
221 Craty|      common use. Its influence on language has been increased ten,
222 Craty|        been made. The instinct of language demands regular grammar
223 Craty|        influence of literature on language we note some other causes
224 Craty|         rhythm, rhyme, and of the language of prose and verse upon
225 Craty|          he will find the English language as perfect and as ready
226 Craty|          structure of the English language differs greatly from that
227 Craty|          a very early instinct of language; for ancient poetry is almost
228 Craty|       appear. In like manner when language is ‘contaminated’ by philosophy
229 Craty|     poetry the form and polish of language is chiefly to be attributed;
230 Craty|          period in the history of language is the transition from verse
231 Craty|        characteristic features of language, affecting both syntax and
232 Craty|      often supersedes the laws of language or the rules of grammar,
233 Craty|        regarded as another law of language which is natural and necessary.
234 Craty|           from the proprieties of language. Every one knows that we
235 Craty|          of a piece of furniture, language becomes unpoetical, in expressive,
236 Craty|    precedes the word and that all language is relative. (1) It is relative
237 Craty|         is also a higher ideal of language in which all is relative—
238 Craty|    brought back the philosophy of language from theory to fact; it
239 Craty|        Lectures on the Science of Language;’ Steinthal, ‘Einleitung
240 Craty|        Essay, Delbruck, ‘Study of Language;’ Paul’s ‘Principles of
241 Craty|      Principles of the History of Language:’ to the latter work the
242 Craty|          education in grammar and language—these are his own words—
243 Craty|           a great deal to do with language; as I was telling you, the
244 Craty|           of the God who invented language and speech; and we may imagine
245 Craty|         according to the Hellenic language, and not according to the
246 Craty|          and not according to the language from which the words are
247 Craty|            genneteira), as in the language of Homer (Od.) gegaasi means
248 Craty|         that the fine fashionable language of modern times has twisted
249 Craty|        zemiodes, which in the old language is clearly indicated.~HERMOGENES:
250 Craty|       conservative of the ancient language, but now they change iota
251 Craty|           delta as in the ancient language, becomes demiodes; and this
252 Craty|           be surprised if the old language when compared with that
253 Craty|         nouns and verbs arrive at language, large and fair and whole;
254 Craty|          but) the ancients formed language, and what they put together
255 Craty|          others who would analyse language to any good purpose must
256 Craty|       rate, not such a subject as language, which is, perhaps, the
257 Craty|         Socrates; but the case of language, you see, is different;
258 Craty|         the most perfect state of language; as the opposite is the