Varieties of Language

When we say that one language is "related" to another, or that two languages belong to the same "family" of languages, what we mean is that they are uninterrupted continuations of what was once one and the same language, but which in course of time has been differentiated, i.e., has developed in one way here and in another way there. On the basis of the greater or less similarity of languages, especially in their oldest shapes, philologists are able to group them together in a way that resembles, but is no exact parallel to the "pedigrees" of living beings. English is more close ly related to Frisian than to German and Dutch—all these, to gether with the Scandinavian languages and the extinct Gothic, form the Germanic (or Gothonic) branch or sub-family of the great Indo-European family of languages (see PHILOLOGY).

Non-local Varieties.

Besides these local provincialisms other varieties of speech are independent of locality, and are therefore as it were perpendicular varieties as distinct from the horizontal local dialects. People moving in the same set will always tend to develop forms of speech not known to others, not only technical terms such as those peculiar to each kind of artisans or to each branch of science, but also words and expressions of a more general character. Some of these varieties are designated by the names argot and jargon, but while the latter term may be loosely used as a contemptuous word for any variety of language that is hard to understand or unnecessarily technical, argot should be restricted to the language used by criminals with the express pur pose of not being understood by outsiders. The elements of such a thieves' language may be taken from the most heterogeneous sources (gypsy and others) or made up quite artificially by dis torting ordinary words (back-slang, etc.). The English name for argot in this sense was cant, which some philologists still use with that meaning.

Slang also to some extent belongs here, though that word should be reserved for the playful production of new expressions, where, properly speaking, nothing new is required, but where the normal expression has grown trite, so that speakers, especially young people, eagerly seize anything fresh that is offered to them, until that again has become trite. It is evident that the varieties with which we are dealing here, are of slighter character than dialects proper, because they chiefly affect parts of the vocabulary and not the whole phonetic and morphological structure of the lan guage.

Where the social stratification is strongly marked, it will leave its stamp on language, so that we may speak of an upper-class language and a lower-class language, even if the distinction is not always so pronounced as in the old Indian drama, where gods, kings, brahmans, etc., spoke Sanskrit, while the lower orders, to which most female characters belonged, spoke a simpler and less refined form called Prakrit.

In his daily life every single individual to some extent modifies his language according to the position of the person he is address ing. In many languages there are two or three forms of the pro

noun of the second person to indicate different degrees of fa miliarity (thou, you in earlier English, tu, vous in French, tu, voi, lei in Italian), but this is nothing to the complicated linguistic ceremonial of some oriental languages, where several degrees of politeness and humility or condescension have found expression in the whole style of address.

In contradistinction to the easy-going speech of everyday life it is natural to use a more solemn style on grave occasions, in poetry, etc., and for such purposes expressions are often chosen which were formerly in current use, but have now grown more or less unfamiliar. This is still more marked in the language of religious ritual, and very often we find a sacred language used exclusively in this connection and partially or wholly unintelli Bible to the laity. Latin, as used in the Roman Catholic Church, and Church Slavonic in the Russian Church, are two examples; several similar ones are found among savages. The angakoks (heathen priests) of Greenland in their incantations of the mighty spirits use a great many strange words not found in ordinary Eskimo. Similar things are reported from many places with regard to the ceremonies by which the young men are solemnly admitted among the adults. The Isneg-negritos of northern Luzon, who ordinarily speak a corrupt Ibanag (Filippino Indonesian), have in their secret nightly ceremonies a totally different language, which they do not understand, but say that they have learnt from their ancestors (Vanovergh and W. Schmidt).

It is common for savages and primitive people to ascribe magical or mystical powers to words, or to some words. Survivals of this superstition are found in our own days even in civilized countries. J. Jakobser discovered that the Shetlanders on their fishing expeditions used a number of words for fish and imple ments which were different from their everyday Scottish words, and which he was able to identify with old Norse words; if they did not use these they believed that their fishing would be unsuc cessful. Jutland peasants at Christmas time are not allowed to use the ordinary words for mice, lice, etc., for then these animals will multiply. It is more and more recognized that similar reasons for the tabu of certain words have operated in making old words disappear, as when the old word for "bear" corresponding to Greek iimeros has given way to words originally meaning "brown" (as English bear) or "honey-eater" (as Russian medvet). Names of gods and goddesses are often interdicted in a similar way, e.g., Jahveh among the Jews; it is a kindred half-religious fear that makes people shy of the proper word for "die," "death," "be killed" and leads to such euphemisms as "pass away," "go West," etc.