FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   72   73   74   75   76   >>  
ving it. Beginning with English we should ask, what means have we for finding out why _I love_ should mean I am actually loving, whereas _I loved_ indicates that that feeling is past and gone? Or, if we look to languages richer in inflections than English, by what process can we discover under what circumstances _amo_, I love, was changed, through the mere addition of an _r_, into _amor_, expressing no longer _I love_, but _I am loved_? Did declensions and conjugations bud forth like the blossoms of a tree? Were they imparted to man ready made by some mysterious power? Or did some wise people invent them, assigning certain letters to certain phases of thought, as mathematicians express unknown quantities by freely chosen algebraic exponents? We are here brought at once face to face with the highest and most difficult problem of our science, the origin of language. But it will be well for the present to turn our eyes away from theories, and fix our attention at first entirely on facts. Let us keep to the English perfect, _I loved_, as compared with the present, _I love_. We cannot embrace at once the whole English grammar, but if we can track one form to its true lair, we shall probably have no difficulty in digging out the rest of the brood. Now, if we ask how the addition of a final _d_ could express the momentous transition from being in love to being indifferent, the first thing we have to do, before attempting any explanation, would be to establish the earliest and most original form of _I loved_. This is a rule which even Plato recognized in his philosophy of language, though, we must confess, he seldom obeyed it. We know what havoc phonetic corruption may make both in the dictionary and the grammar of a language, and it would be a pity to waste our conjectures on formations which a mere reference to the history of language would suffice to explain. Now a very slight acquaintance with the history of the English language teaches us that the grammar of modern English is not the same as the grammar of Wycliffe. Wycliffe's English again may be traced back to what, with Sir Frederick Madden, we may call Middle English, from 1500 to 1330; Middle English to Early English, from 1330 to 1230; Early English to Semi-Saxon from 1230 to 1100; and Semi-Saxon to Anglo-Saxon.(102) It is evident that if we are to discover the original intention of the syllable which changes _I love_ into _I loved_, we must consult the original form
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   72   73   74   75   76   >>  



Top keywords:

English

 
language
 

grammar

 

original

 

addition

 

express

 
present
 
history
 

Middle

 
Wycliffe

discover

 

digging

 

difficulty

 

establish

 

earliest

 

transition

 

momentous

 

indifferent

 
attempting
 

explanation


conjectures

 

traced

 

Frederick

 

teaches

 
modern
 

Madden

 
intention
 

syllable

 

consult

 
evident

acquaintance

 

slight

 

obeyed

 

phonetic

 

seldom

 

philosophy

 
confess
 

corruption

 

reference

 

suffice


explain

 

formations

 

dictionary

 

recognized

 
expressing
 
longer
 

declensions

 

changed

 
conjugations
 

imparted