The Sanscrit, though it has now in a great measure ceas ed to be a living tongue, is considered in India as the language of science ; and it is pretty certain, that it was the immediate parent of the numerous languages still spoken through that vast peninsula as far as the borders of China. Two-and-thirty at least of those more obscure and inferior languages have been recognised and distinguished by the missionaries at Serampore ; and it is worthy of no tice, that while many of those vary considerably in their in flections, the radical parts of their words exhibit a simi larity sufficient to ascertain their common origin.
To the eastward of India we find a language prevailing, totally dissimilar in many respects to those which have already come under notice, the language of China, made up in a great measure of monosyllables, and which can hardly be said to have any inflections for distinguishing nouns, verbs, or attributives. Its distinct words are very few, but these are varied in pronunciation by accent, emphasis, and other marks, to fit each of them for expressing many dif ferent ideas,—.a mode of speech so inconvenient and embar rassing, that recourse must often be had to the written character for indicating the particular meaning. These written characters constitute in fact the substantial part of the language ; they are extremely numerous, amounting it is said to no less than eighty thousand, formed from 214 roots, termed keys or elementary characters, each of which is itself significant, and by additions to which, not to the. vocal sounds, all the varieties of meaning are conveyed. In this language, from its peculiar structure, as well as in the languages of many remoter tribes and islands, so many changes appear to have taken place, that the traces of the primitive language have almost ceased to be discerni ble.
Having thus endeavoured to tak€ a general view of the actual progress and filiations of language in the different quarters of the globe, it remains only to notice the circum stances which constitute THE EXCELLENCE AND PERFEC TION OF LANGUAGE. These may in general be stated to
consist in perspicuity and adequate copiousness, affording accurate expressions for all the various conceptions and, separate ideas of the human mind ; precision, having always one definite meaning to each word ; regularity of structure; and ny in its sounds. No language pos -es,,es all ( I these dualities ce.mpletely ; sonic, however, Jpproaeh t car: r th..n others to petit ction. Any inquiries, however, into the compatative excellencies of each, and the discussion of the omen agitated qurstion, whether those laLguages arc to b.: deemed most perfect, which, like tie ancient Greek or Latin, mark tlx coanges of nutms and verbs by inflections of the words thvm selves ; or those which, as the modern langua;;es of Eu rope, have recourse to separate particulars and auxil iaiv words ? are subjects m hich belong more properly to The same remark applies to the discus -,ions regarding the use of language in composition, and the %alleles modes in which it may be best adapted to the ulk of the poet, the orator, the historian, and the philoso phe.
It may be right here, just to mention:the ingenious but isiunat y attempt of Bishop Wilkins to construct a philoso phical language and real character, in which the objects of knowledge were to be arranged under certain heads and divisions, and words and characters to be formed with changes corresponding to each. The impracticability of re ducing such a system to practice, and bringing into use even among the learned such a language, is too obvious to require discussion.
The writers upon language most deserving attention, are mentioned under the article GRAMMAR ; to those taken notice of there may be added, Townsend On the Character of Moses, vol. iii.; Jenisch Comparison of Eu ropean Language ; and Dr. Dewar's Dissertation on Lan guage, in the 7th volume of the Edinburgh Philosophical Transactions ; Bryant's Mythology ; Pezron's (J)