View source for Page:EB1911 - Volume 21.djvu/452

← Page:EB1911 - Volume 21.djvu/452

You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reason:

Your IP address is in a range that has been blocked on all Wikimedia Foundation wikis.

The block was made by ‪EPIC‬. The reason given is Open proxy/Webhost: See the help page if you are affected.

Start of block: 08:48, 2 July 2024
Expiry of block: 08:48, 2 July 2025

Your current IP address is 206.189.44.186. The blocked range is 206.189.32.0/20.

Please include all above details in any queries you make. If you believe you were blocked by mistake, you can find additional information and instructions in the No open proxies global policy.

Otherwise, to discuss the block please post a request for review on Meta-Wiki. You could also send an email to the stewards VRT queue at stewards@wikimedia.org including all above details.

You can view and copy the source of this page.

<noinclude><pagequality level="3" user="DivermanAU" />{{EB1911 Page Heading|430|PhiLoLoGY||  }}</noinclude>
death). Both works are already somewhat antiquated. As
to the history of the study, see Lersch’s ''Sprachphilosophie der''
''Alten'' (1840); Steinthal’s ''Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft bei''
''den Griechen und Römern'' (1863); Benfey’s ''Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft''
''und Orientalischen Philologie in Deutschland'' (1869);
Sandys’s ''History of Classical Scholarship'' (3&nbsp;vols., 1906–1908);
Vilh Thomsen’s ''Sprogardenskatens Historien Kortpattit franckling''
(1902). {{EB1911 footer initials|William Dwight Whitney|W. D. W.}}
{{clear}}
{{center|II.—''Comparative Philology of the Indo-European Languages''.}}
The study of Indo-European comparative philology has from
its outset necessarily been in close connexion with the study of
Sanskrit, a language unparalleled amongst its cognates in
antiquity and distinctness of structure, and consequently the
natural basis of comparison in this field. It is therefore not
to be wondered at that we find no clear views of the mutual
relationship of the individual members of the Indo-European
family or their position with regard to other languages until
Sanskrit began to attract the attention of European philologists,
or that the introduction of Sanskrit as an object of study was
closely followed by the discovery of the original community
of a vast range of languages and dialects hitherto not brought
into connexion at all, or only made the objects of baseless
speculations. We meet with the first clear conception
{{EB1911 Shoulder HeadingSmall|Historical Sketch.}}
of this idea of an Indo-European community
of languages in the distinguished English scholar
Sir William Jones, who, as early as 1786, expressed himself
as follows: “The Sanskrit language, whatever may be its
antiquity, is of wonderful structure; more perfect than the Greek,
more copious than the Latin, and more exquisitely refined than
either, yet bearing to both of them a stronger affinity, both in
the roots of verbs and in the forms of grammar, than could have
been produced by accident; so strong that no philologer could
examine all the three without believing them to have sprung
from some common source which, perhaps, no longer exists.
There is a similar reason, though not quite so forcible, for supposing
that both the Gothic and the Celtic, though blended with a
different idiom, had the same origin with the Sanskrit.”<ref name=430f1/> But
neither Sir William Jones nor any of his older contemporaries
who had arrived at similar conclusions ever raised this important
discovery from a brilliant ''aperçu'' into a valid scientific theory
through a detailed and systematic comparison of the languages
in question. To have achieved this is the undoubted merit of
the German, {{EB1911 lkpl|Bopp, Franz|Franz Bopp}}&nbsp;(''q.v.''), the founder of scientific philology
of the Indo-European languages, and subsequently
{{EB1911 Shoulder HeadingSmall|Bopp and<br>J. Grimm.}}
through this example also the founder of comparative
philology in general. Next to him {{EB1911 lkpl|Grimm, Jacob Ludwig Carl|Jacob Grimm}}&nbsp;(''q.v.'')
must be mentioned here as the father of historical grammar.
The first part of his famous ''Deutsche Grammatik'' appeared in
1819, three years after Bopp had published his first epoch-making
book, ''Ueber das Conjugationssystem der Sanskritsprache''.
Bopp’s results were here at once utilized, yet Grimm’s whole
system was entirely independent of that of Bopp, and had no
doubt been worked out before Grimm knew of his illustrious
predecessor. In fact, their scientific aims and methods were
totally different. Bopp’s interest was not concentrated in
comparison as such, but chiefly inclined towards the explanation
of the origin of grammatical forms, and comparison to him was
only a means of approaching that end.

In this more or less speculative turn of his interest Bopp
showed himself the true son of a philosophical period when
general linguistics received its characteristic stamp from the
labours and endeavours of men like the two Schlegels and Wilhelm
von Humboldt. Jacob Grimm’s aims were of a less lofty
character than those of Bopp, whose work, to his own mind,
was crowned by his theory of the origin of inflexion through
agglutination. In confining his task to a more limited range
than the vast field of Indo-European languages embraced in<ref follow=430f1>
For this quotation and the following historical sketch in general
see Th. Benfey, ''Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft'', p.&nbsp;438 (Munich,
1869), and especially B. Delbrück, ''Introduction to the Study of''
''Language'', p.&nbsp;1 (Leipzig, 1882; a fifth German edition appeared in
1909).</ref>
<!--col.-->
Bopp’s researches, and thus fixing his attention on a group of
idioms exhibiting a striking regularity in their mutual relationship,
both where they coincide and where they differ, he made it
his foremost object to investigate and illustrate the continuous
progress, subject to definite laws, by which these languages had
been developed from their common source. He thus raised
the hitherto neglected study of the development of sounds
to an equal level With the study of grammatical forms, which
had so far almost exclusively absorbed all the interest of linguistic
research. Grimm’s discovery of the so-called “Lautverschiebung,” or Law of the Permutation of Consonants in the Teutonic
languages (which, however, had been partly found and proclaimed
before Grimm by the Danish scholar Rask), became
especially important as a stimulus for further investigation in
this line. Grimm’s influence on comparative philology (which
is secondary only to that of Bopp, although he was never a
comparative philologist in the sense that Bopp was, and did not
always derive the benefit from Bopp’s works which they might
have afforded him) is clearly traceable in the work of Bopp’s
successors, amongst Whom Friedrich August Pott (1802–1887)
is universally judged to hold the foremost rank. In his great
work, ''Etymologische Forschungen auf dem Gebiete der indogermanischen''
''Sprachen'', ''mit besonderem Bezug auf die Lautumwandlung''
''im Sanskrit'', ''Griechischen'', ''Lateinischen'', ''Littauischen'',
''und Gothischen'' (Lemgo, 1833–1836), we find Indo-European
etymology for the first time based on a scientific investigation
of general Indo-European phonology. Amongst Pott’s contemporaries
Theodor Benfey deserves mention on account of his
{{EB1911 Shoulder HeadingSmall|Benfey.}}
''Griechisches Wurzellexicon'' (Berlin, 1839), a work
equally remarkable for copiousness of contents
and power of combination, yet showing no advance on Bopp’s
standpoint in its conception of phonetic changes.

A third period in the history of Indo-European philology
is marked by the name of August Schleicher, whose ''Compendium''
''der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen''
''Sprachen'' first appeared in 1861. In
the period subsequent to the appearance of Pott’s ''Etymologische''
''Forschungen'', a number of distinguished scholars, too large to
{{EB1911 Shoulder HeadingSmall|Schleicher.}}
be recorded here individually,<ref name=430f2/> had devoted their labours to
the different branches of Indo-European philology, especially
assisted and promoted in their work by the rapidly progressing
Vedic (and Avestic) studies that had been inaugurated by Rosen,
Roth, Benfey, Westergaard, Muller, Kuhn, Aufrecht and others.
Moreover, new foundations had been laid for the study of the
Slavonic languages by Miklosich and Schleicher, of Lithuanian
by Kurschat and Schleicher, of Celtic by Zeuss. Of the
classical languages Greek had found a most distinguished
representative in Curtius, while Corssen, Mommsen, Aufrecht,
Kirchhoff, &c., had collected most valuable materials towards<ref follow=430f2>
The extensive progress made in this period is best illustrated
by the foundation of two periodicals especially devoted to Indo-European
comparative philology, Kuhn’s ''Zeitschrift für vergleichende''
''Sprachforschung'' (now 27&nbsp;vols., Berlin, from 1851), and
Kuhn’s ''Beiträge zur vergleichenden Sprachforschung'' (8&nbsp;vols., Berlin,
from 1858) Benfey’s school is more especially represented by the
contributors to Benfey’s ''Orient und Occident'' (3&nbsp;vols., Göttingen,
from 1862), and subsequently through Bezzenberger’s ''Beiträge zur''
''Kunde der indogermanischen Sprachen'' (30&nbsp;vols., Göttingen, from
1877); this journal has now been amalgamated with Kuhn’s Zeitschrift
The views of the “New Grammarians”—Leskien, Brugmann,
Osthoff and their schools—are represented in ''Indogermanische''
''Forschungen'' (27&nbsp;vols., since 1890). The Göttingen school has a
further representative in ''Glotta'', now (1910) in its third volume.
The history of the meaning of words has a special periodical for itself,
''Wörter und Sachen'', now in its second volume. Besides those
mentioned there are many journals, publications of academies, &c.,
in Belgium, Sweden, Denmark, Italy, &c., which no serious student
of comparative philology can ignore. France possesses two periodicals
of the same kind, the ''Revue de Linguistique'' (Paris, from 1868)
and the ''Mémoires de la Société de Linguistique de Paris'' (also from
1868), while England is represented by the ''Proceedings and Transactions''
of the Philological Societies of London and Cambridge, the
''Classical Review'' (23&nbsp;vols., since 1887), and the ''Classical Quarterly''
(4&nbsp;vols., since 1907), and America by the ''Transactions of the American''
''Philological Association'' (from 1868), the ''American Journal of''
''Philology'' (30&nbsp;vols., from 1880), ''Classical Philology'' (5&nbsp;vols., from
1906), and other more specialist organs.</ref><noinclude>
{{smallrefs}}</noinclude>

Templates used on this page:

Template:Center (view source) (protected)
Template:Center/styles.css (view source) (semi-protected)
Template:Clear (view source) (semi-protected)
Template:Div end (view source) (protected)
Template:EB1911 Page Heading (edit)
Template:EB1911 Shoulder Heading (view source) (semi-protected)
Template:EB1911 Shoulder HeadingSmall (edit)
Template:EB1911 footer initials (edit)
Template:EB1911 lkpl (edit)
Template:Font size block/s (edit)
Template:Font size block/styles.css (edit)
Template:Optional style (view source) (protected)
Template:RunningHeader (view source) (protected)
Template:RunningHeader/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Template:Small-caps (view source) (protected)
Template:Smallrefs (edit)
Template:Smallrefs/styles.css (edit)
Template:X-larger block (view source) (semi-protected)
Template:X-larger block/e (edit)
Template:X-larger block/s (edit)
Index:EB1911 - Volume 01.djvu/styles.css (edit)
Index:EB1911 - Volume 21.djvu/styles.css (edit)
Module:Arguments (view source) (protected)
Module:Optional style (view source) (protected)
Module:Running header (view source) (protected)

Return to Page:EB1911 - Volume 21.djvu/452.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:EB1911_-_Volume_21.djvu/452"