In support of this statement, may be adduced the following observations : 1. We have seen that hieroglyphics did become significant of sounds ; and (see LANGUAGE) that words, originally significant of one class of ideas, being ap plied to a second, lost their connection with the former, and became directly sig nificant of the latter.
2. We have reason to believe that words were originally monosyllabic in those nations where alphabetical writing was invented, and that the combination of old sounds, or the use of them, uncom pounded to express new ideas, was the mode employed to extend the capabilities of their language. Hence the same word would frequently occur in combination, and though its different significations must originally have been represented by dif ferent hieroglyphics, yet, as these losf.. their significancy, they would easily be come as extensive in their meaning as the sounds themselves. And it is obvious that the most simple of those hieroglY. phics which were used for the same sound, would be employed to represent the sound.
3. It has been shown to be highly pro bable, that originally every consonant had its vowel sound. Hence all syllables might be represented by two, or at most three, European letters. This circumstance would materially diminish the varieties of syllabic sounds.
4. The probability of the theory ad vanced depends greatly upon the hypo thesis, that originally letters were syllabic. The following facts appear to prove this : The ancient oriental alphabets had no de notements for vowels, and even if this be disputed, it must be admitted that they had many words into which none of the supposed vowel marks entered. Tire 'Ethiopian alphabet is entirely syllabic. The simple letters denote a consonant and a short a, and marks were added 'to them to denote other vowels where used. What is doubly singular, they have in many cases added marks to these syllabic characters, to denote they have no vowel belonging to them. In the Coptic and Arabic there are syllabic characters. The alphabets of the eastern Asiatics are prin cipally syllabic, some with 6, others with x, joined to a consonant. These circum stances render probable the account here given of the transition from hieroglyphics to letters. The following observations more completely ascertain its high proba bility.
5. The letters of some of the ancient alphabets have so great a resemblance to the hieroglyphical characters; indeed are such exact transcripts of them, that a sim ple inspection is sufficient to convince us that hieroglyphics were the origin of let ters. This, however, proves little as to the invention of alphabetical writing, ex cept that it was subsequent to the use of hieroglyphics. But, 6. These characters, in many instances, retained their original significancy, which proves them to have been, as De Guignes supposes, denotements for words. We must not expect to find this significancy in all words of which they form compo nent parts ; but in such only in whose visi ble representation the original hierogly phic formed a component part. Now we must observe, first, that the names of several of the oriental letters are still by themselves significant, and that some of these letters are similar to the Chinese clefs, which have the same signification. Thus the s yod signifies the hand. Its form, in some alphabets, resembles the Chinese character for hand. The -1 daleth
of the Hebrews, Phenicians, and Ethi Opians, signifies a gate, and the action of opening. The hieroglyphic which among the ancient Chinese represented a gate, is exactly similar to this letter. The phi of the Hebrews and of of the Ethi opians signify the mouth. The Chinese characters for the mouth all resemble it. The p ain signifies the eye. The Plienici ans and the Chinese employed the out line of the eye as a denotement of the ob ject. The tp shin in Hebrews signifies the teeth, and its figure is still found among the Chinese with the same signification. mim signifies water. The corres ponding Samaritan and Ethiopian cha racters have a strong resemblance to the Chinese hieroglyphic for water. Lastly, the ei aleph (originally perhaps signifying ox) signifies unity, the action of conducting, pre-eminence. The Phenician form of this exactly represents the Chinese character for one, and every action by which we are at the head of others. But these letters are not only significant by themselves, but secondly in combinations. Thus I was expressed by the monosyllable ya, ye, or you ; to this another monosyllable, which had equally a signification relative to the figure, being added, formed a word of two syllables. For instance, instead of the present denomination of 1 daleth, we may reasonably suppose its original sound to have been da. The word -F yada, hiero glyphically represented by a gate and a hand, is found in the Hebrew with a signi fication derived from that of the letters composing it ; to cast out (as we might say, hand him to the door), to extend. Add to this the word p ain (originally probably sounded ho), which signifies the eye, and we have yadaho, which should signify to open the eyes, to extend the view, &c. and metaphorically, to know, to understand ; and, in fact, this is the signification of yr in Hebrew. But this is not all, for exactly the same procedure has been adopted by the Chinese. which signifies to exa mine, is composed of three radical cha racters, of which the first signifies the hand, the second a gate, the third the eye. So also kia is composed of three cha racters, one signifying the teeth, the other two, gate or opening, which signifies to break through, to make a great opening.
In Hebrew -ra is similarly composed.
It signifies to plunder, to lay waste. Tchi is a large collection of water. It was composed of the characters for hand and water. The same compound was formed among the Hebrews, and yam, signifies a great collection of water, or the sea. In Arabic the letters diet or earth, and mim or water, from the word them, and signify a flood. The Hebrew thin is composed of the Chet or earth, and the nun, which signi fies man, i. e. man of the earth, and further, to form, to create. In both these instances, the Chinese correspond in their combi nations with the alphabetical writing. Many other instances might be brought. We will adduce one to which there is no corresponding combination in the Chi- nese language. Rb, or Naha, :14, signifies father. The component parts of it signify principal of the home.
The papers of De Guignes, to which we are very greatly indebted on this sub ject, are to he found in Memoires de l'Academie des Inscriptions et des Belles Lettres, vol. 34, &c.