Page:A dictionary of printers and printing.djvu/20

Rh The alphabet of every language consists of a number of letters, which ought each to have a different sound, figure, and use. As the difference of articulate sounds, was intended to express the different ideas of the mind, so one letter was originally intended to signify only one sound, and not, as at present, to express sometimes one sound and sometimes another, which practice has brought confusion into the languages, and rendered the acquisition of modeer tongues a more difficult task than it would otherwise have been. As the number of sounds and articulations differ in various languages, so the number of letters differ in the alphabets of different nations, although, not in proportion to their respective copiousness. The English alphabet contains twenty-six letters; French, twenty-five; Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac, and Samaritan, twenty-two; Arabic, twenty-eight; Persian, thirty-one; Turkish, thirty-three; Georgian, thirty-six; Coptic, thirty-two; Muscovite, forty-three; Greek, twenty-four; Latin, twenty-five; Slavonic, twenty-seven; Dutch, twenty-six; Spanish, twenty-seven; Italian, twenty; Ethopic and Tartarian, two hundred and two; Sancrist, fifty; Indians of Bengal, twenty-one; Burmese, nineteen; The Chinese, properly speaking, have no alphabet, except we call their whole language their alphabet.

As my limits will not allow me to enter more fully into the origin of language, I shall briefly show that every language, has ideas and terms, expressly their own—for instance, our terms in polite literature, prove that these came from Greece: our terms in music and painting, that these came from Italy; our phrases in cookery and war, that we learnt these from the French; our phrases in navigation, that we were taught them by the Flemings, and low Dutch. These, many and different sources, of our language, may be the cause why it is so deficient in regularity and analogy;—yet we have this advantage to compensate the defect, that, what we want in elegance, we gain in copiousness, in which last respect few languages will be found superior to our own.

And from what has been said, it appears that language was at first barren in words, but descriptive by the sound of these words; and expressive in the manner of uttering them, by the aid of significant tones, and gestures. It appears that in all successive changes which language has undergone as the world advanced, the understanding has gained ground, on the fancy and imagination. The progress of language in this respect resembles the age of man:—the imagination is most vigorous and predominant in youth—with advancing years the imagination cools, and the understanding ripens. Thus, language proceeded from sterility to copiousness, and, at the same time, proceeded from uncertainty to accuracy, from fire and enthusiasm, to coolness and precision; in its ancient state, more favourable to poetry and oratory; in its present, to reason and philosophy.

In Dr. Armstrong's Gaelic Dictionary the word sack, meaning a bag, is found to be the same in meaning and pronunciation, in twenty-three languages; and he is of opinion that this is one of the few words which have come down to us from the original language of man. The Gaelic, Hebrew, Chaldaic, sac; Arabic, saqu; Coptic, pisok, meaning a pannier; Latin, saceus; Italian, sacco; Spanish, saco and saca; Belgic, sack; French, sac; Dutch, zac; Swedish, sack; Gothic, sack; German, sack; Danish and Norse sack; Hungarian, sack; Turkish, sak; Georgian, sack; Anglo Saxon, sacce and sace; Irish, sac; Welsh, sach; Cornish, zak.

From the above statements which have been adduced on the origin of writing, and