ly, and of course independently of experience; for in stance, a smile, or frown, or the signs of terror. The opinion, that there is to a certain extent an original or instinctive interpretation of signs is maintained by writers on the following grounds.(1) The power of interpreting such signs is noticed at a very early period, long be fore the ability to interpret arbitrary signs.) Children understand the meaning of smiles and frowns, of a soothing or threatening tone of voice at a time of life, when they cannot be supposed capable of so much observation as to remark the connection between a passion and its external effect. (2) Those signs, which are maintained to be susceptible of an instinctive interpretation, affect us more than others. The passions of hatred, love, and anger, interest us much more strongly, when they are represented in the countenance, than when they are expressed by mere written or spoken words. So that unquestionably we give to some natural signs a significancy, which we do not, and cannot give to others, and still less to those forms of language, which are purely arbitrary. This being the case, it seems to be reasonable to conclude, that the mind has an original power of interpreting to some extent. (3) This power seems to be necessary as an introductory step to the formation of oral and alphabetical language. Artificial language, whether we regard it as written or spoken, is arbitrary, and a matter of mere agreement. But if it were not of divine original, as some have contended, it is evident, that there must have been some antecedent signs, by means of which such agreement was first formed.* And we can think of no instrument, which could have been employed to this end, except the instinctive power of interpreting those signs of gesture, tones of voice, and move

*These considerations may be satisfactory to the minds of most persons; still there are some, who profess to doubt of the existence of this power. Among other dissenters from the more commonly received opinion, is Dr. Priestly, who has remarked on the subject a SECT. XI. of his Examination of Reid. But the amount of his ar gument can be summed up in this brief statement, that his own chil dren, (which might have been the case,) were in his opinion with out the ability in question

ments of the countenance, which we find from the earliest period of life to be expressive of emotions and the passions.

§. 145. Considerations on the use of Natural signs.

Before dismissing the subject of this chapter, it remains to be remarked, that it is one of no little practical importance, although it may often be thought otherwise.

An attention to natural signs could hardly fail to be of advantage in infant schools, and in all cases of instruction of very young children. The knowledge, which is suited to their minds, is that, which we have already described as having an external origin. Consequently, the objects or actions, with which they are to be made acquainted, must be presented to the sight, or some other of the senses. But in the absence of objects, the instructer, if he have studied the language of natural signs, will be able to convey the meaning of many words by gestures; a method, which will secure the purpose designed, and will not be wanting in interest to the little pupils.

"Notwithstanding (says Dugald Stewart) the decline of natural language in consequence of the use of artificial signs, the acquaintance, which we still have with the former, (however imperfect,) is of essential service in teaching children the meaning of the latter. This may be easily exemplified by first reading over to a child one of Esop's fables without taking your eye from the book, or using any inflection of voice; and afterwards telling him the same story with the commentary of your face, and gestures, and tones."- -Again, the doctrine of natural signs is deserving of greater attention than it has received, when it is considered in connection with the Deaf and Dumb. No small acquaintance with them is implied in being able to fix upon such as are suitable in the instruction of these unfortunate persons. And the worth of such acquaintance, therefore, can be conjectured from its subserviency to their improvement and happiness.

Further, some knowledge of natural signs might be found profitable to all travellers and sojourners among nations of an unknown tongue, and among others to Mis

sionaries. One of the American missionaries in India, remarking on the acquisition of languages, observes, that, in receiving lessons from his instructer, they were often compelled to resort to signs and gestures, in order at all to understand each other. These are not unimportant considerations,and there is ground for making this remark also, that a knowledge of natural signs is subservient in some measure to the success of the fine or liberal arts, particularly sculpture, painting,and oratory.

The arts of sculpture and painting are addressed to the eye; and one great object in those arts is to express emotions. Those, therefore, who practise them, must study the connection between the illuminations of the eye, the colour and muscular movements of the face, and the general attitude which are the natural outward signs, and the internal feelings which correspond to them. It is not possible, that a single trait of character or even a single feeling should be conveyed by those admirable arts, except by means of natural signs. And hence the obvious conclusion, that no man can excel in them without a knowledge of that form of language. Similar remarks will apply to the orator. He addresses the eye as well as the ear; and whenever he combines the language of looks, tones, and gestures with the arbitrary signs of ar ticulate speech, he cannot fail to increase the interest of his hearers.

CHAPTER THIRTEENTH.

LANGUAGE. (II) ORAL SIGNS.

§. 146. Remarks on the original formation of oral signs. MEN are not left, in communicating their thoughts, to the assistances merely, which are furnished by natural signs. Possessed of the organs of speech, they are capable of forming signs, which are addressed to the ear, and are from their very nature in a great degree conventional and arbitrary. Such is the difficulty of employing the complicated machinery of articulation so as to form words, that it has been a doubt in the minds of some, whether men, left to themselves, would ever have acquired this power? After the power has been once attained, others may acquire it, as we daily see in the case of children, by a long and laborious process of imitating; but it undeniably demands some fortitude of belief to persuade ourselves, that the unaided faculties of the mind were equal to the original acquisition.

Hence it has been the opinion of the persons above alluded to, that we are indebted for the power of forming oral signs, or of speaking, to the direct interference of the Deity himself in behalf of our first parents. This is undoubtedly a matter of opinion, but not of clear and decided proof. The Bible, which is designed rather to subserve the moral and religious interests of mankind, than to gratify antiquarian curiosity, does not set us at rest on this point. It does indeed say, that God brought the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air to Adam to see what, he would call them; but it is not said, that God gave the

names himself, or that he directly aided Adam in giving them; although the supposition, that such assistance was granted, may be held to be supported by that beneficence, which is continually manifested in the dealings of the Supreme Being with his creatures.

§. 147. Oral signs or words are in general arbitrary.

In oral language, sounds stand for things, or rather the ideas of things; but there is no resemblance between the sign, and the thing signified. The fact, that articulated sounds, or words, are representative of the states of the mind, is founded on arbitrary agreement. And as this agreement necessarily involves the consent of the great mass of any people, by whom oral signs are employed, the alledged confession of the emperor Augustus was made with good reason, that he was individually unable to introduce a single new word into the Latin tongue.

If this statement were not correct, if words had any natural fitness for that purpose, for which they are employed, and were not conventional, there would be but one language; all nations would use the same words, instead of the English employing the word, WHITE; the Latin language, ALBUS; the French, BLANC; and the German, WEISS for the same thing, with a similar diversity in the expres sion of other ideas, and in other languages.

It ought to be observed, however, that there is a slight exception to this general view of the arbitrary nature of oral signs. We allude to a class of terms, of which the words, CRASH, TWANG, BUZZ, WHISTLE, SHRILL, RATTLE, may be mentioned as specimens. There is evidently some resemblance between these words, as they are enunciated by the voice, and the things, for which they stand; in other languages, some words, similar to these, that is, having a like relation to the things, for which they stand, are to be found. But with this exception, which is one of very limited extent, words are truly arbitrary and conventional signs, formed in the progressive history of the human race on such occasions of want or of convenience as seemed to call for them. These occasions, on which words were first