more irrational in itself, than it is destitute of evidence. It is irrational, as it excludes the primary use, the conversion of the nations, for which, by the general acknowledgment of Christians in all ages, the gift of tongues was bestowed on the apostles, and represents this extraordinary power as serving merely to astonish the hearers, the only purpose, according to him, for which it ever was exerted. And as to evidence, the great support of his system is an argument which has been sufficiently considered already, the defects of the style of the sacred writers, when examined by the rules of the rhetoricians, and the example of the orators of Athens. For, because Cicero and the Greek philosophers were of opinion, that if Jupiter spoke Greek he would speak like Plato, the learned Doctor cannot conceive that a style so unlike Plato's as that of the evangelists, can be the language of inspiration, or be accounted worthy of God. It was not, we find, peculiar to the Greeks, or to the apostolic age, to set too high a value on the words which man's wisdom teacheth. Nor was it only in the days of Samuel, that men needed to be taught that "the Lord seeth not as man seeth," 1 Sam. 16: 7.

DISSERTATION II.

THE CAUSES TO WHICH THE PRINCIPAL DIFFERENCES IN LANGUAGES ARE IMPUTABLE; THE ORIGIN OF THE CHANGES PRODUCED ON THE LANGUAGE AND THE IDIOM OF THE JEWS; AND THE PRINCIPAL DIFFICULTIES TO BE ENCOUNTERED IN TRANSLATING THE SACRED BOOKS.

PART I.

THE CAUSES OF THE DIFFERENCES IN LANGUAGES.

WHEN We compare one tongue with another, if we enter critically into the genius and powers of each we shall find, that neither the only nor the chief difference is that which is most obvious, and consists in the sounds or words employed, the inflections, the arrangement, and the construction. These may soon be learnt from a tolerable grammar, and are to be considered as affecting only the form of the language. There are others, which, more intimately affecting its spirit, it requires a nicer discernment to distinguish. These serve much more to characterize both the language and the people who speak it. Indeed, the knowledge of one of these has a great effect in advancing the knowledge of the other. We may say, with the greatest justice, that as, on the one hand, the real character of a nation will not be thoroughly understood by one who is a perfect stranger to their tongue; so, on the other, the exact import of many of the words, and combinations of words, made use of in the language, will never be perfectly comprehended by one who knows nothing of the character of the people, who is totally unacquainted with the history of their religion, law, polity, arts, manners, and customs. Whoever, therefore, would be a proficient in either kind, must be a student in both. It is evident, that the particulars enumerated, or whatever regards the religion, the laws, the constitution, and the manners of a people, operate powerfully on their sentiments; and these have a principal effect, first on the associations of ideas formed in their minds in relation to character, and to whatever is an object of abstract reflection; secondly, on the formation of words, and combination of phrases, by which these associations are expressed. But this will be better understood from what follows.

2. There are certain words, in every language, to which there are other words perfectly corresponding in other languages. There are certain words, in every language, which but imperfectly correspond to any of the words of other languages. There are certain words, in every language, to which there is nothing, in some other languages, in any degree correspondent. I shall exemplify these three classes in Greek, Latin, and English, which will sufficiently illustrate my meaning.

3. In all languages, the words whereby the obvious productions of nature, and the plainest distinctions of genera and species known to the people are signified, correspond respectively to one another. Thus to the Greek words, ἥλιος, σελήνη, ὄρνις, δένδρον, αετός, aunelos, lios, the Latin words, sol, luna, avis arbor, aquila, vitis, lapis, and the English, sun, moon, bird, tree, eagle, vine, stone, are perfectly equivalent in signification; and we are sure that we can never mistake in rendering the Greek word ios, wherever it occurs, into Latin by the word sol, and into English by the word sun. The same thing holds true of the other terms in the three languages, taken severally, in the order in which I have placed them.

To this class we must add the names of natural and obvious relations, as πατήρ, μήτηρ, υιός, θυγατήρ, ἀδελφός, αδελφή, το which the Latin words pater, mater, filius, filia, frater, soror, and the English words father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, perfectly correspond.

To the same class we ought also to assign those words whereby the most common and necessary productions of the mechanic arts are expressed; for though, in different countries, and distant ages, there are considerable differences in the fashion and appearance of their productions, we attend solely, in translating, to the principal uses which a piece of work was intended to answer. Consequently, when in these we find an entire coincidence, we, without further examination, pronounce the names equivalent. Thus oixos, vaus, uλivη, in Greek, and domus, navis, lectus, in Latin, answer sufficiently to house, ship, bed, in English, on account of the coincidence in use of the things signified, notwithstanding the less important differences in structure and workmanship.

These, however, are not entirely on the same footing with natural objects; in which there is every-where, and in every age, a more perfect uniformity. The names ßißliov, liber, book, are in most cases suited to one another. But as the books of the ancients were in outward form and construction very different from ours, when we find any thing advanced concerning ßißliov in Greek, or liber in Latin, with an evident allusion to the outward make, we know that the English word book is not a proper version. Thus the words οὐρανὸς ἀπεχωρίσθη ὡς βιβλίον ἑιλισσόμενον, Rev. 6: 14, if rendered "heaven departed as a book that is rolled up," would

not be intelligible, though nothing conveys a more distinct image than the words in the original. Their books consisted of long scrolls, commonly of parchment, sewed or pasted together, and fastened at the ends to two rollers. Our translators properly therefore employed here the more general word scroll, which perfectly conveys the meaning. Again, the word Pißiov occurs in an application wherein the term book could not be rightly apprehended by a mere English reader : βιβλίον γεγραμμένον ἔσωθεν καὶ ὄπισθεν, in the common version, "a book written within and on the back side," Rev. 5: 1. To such a reader, the last term thus applied would be understood to mean the cover, which is not very fit for being written on, and could, besides, contain no more than might have been contained in one additional leaf, though the book had consisted of a thousand leaves. Now the long scrolls or books of the ancients were seldom written but on one side, here said to be Loader, within, because that side was turned inwards in rolling. When any of these scrolls was written on both sides, it contained twice as much as if written in the usual way.* The chief intention of the prophet in mentioning this circumstance must have been to signify, that this volume was replete with information, and that its contents were not to be measured by its size. But notwithstanding the exceptions in a few particular cases, the names of the common productions of the most necessary arts may be considered as so far at least corresponding to each other in most languages, as not to throw any difficulty worth mentioning in the way of a translator.

4. The second class above-mentioned is of those words which, in one language, do but imperfectly correspond to any of the words of another language compared with it. Of this kind will be found, if properly attended to, most of the terms relating to morals, to the passions and matters of sentiment, or to the objects of the reflex and internal senses, in regard to which it is often impossible to find words in one language that are exactly equivalent to those of another. This holds in all languages less or more, according as there is more or less uniformity in the constitution, religion, and laws, of the nations whose languages are compared; on which constitution, religion, and laws, as was observed, the sentiments, manners, and customs of the people, in a great measure depend. Herein consists one principal difficulty, which translators, if persons of penetration, have to encounter. Finding it sometimes impossible to render fully the sense of their author, they are constrained (if I may borrow a term from the mathematicians) to do the best they can by approximation.

A book executed in this manner the Greeks called oлiodóɣçaços, which is thus expressed by Juvenal, "Scriptus et in tergo." Sat. 1.

To come to examples : To the Greek words αρετή, σωφροσύνη, ἐγκράτεια, φρόνησις, ἔλεος, the Latin words, virtus, temperantia, continentia, prudentia, misericordia, are not entirely equivalent; still less the English words, virtue, temperance, continence, prudence, mercy; for, though these last are manifestly formed from the Latin words, one would think that, by being adopted into another country, they had all, more or less, changed their nature with the climate. Those persons whose knowledge in such matters is but superficial, will not enter readily into these sentiments. They are accustomed to consider certain words, in the different languages, as respectively correspondent. The grammars, lexicons, and common translations, lead thein to conclude so, and they inquire no further. But those who are conversant with authors of reputation in these different tongues, will need no arguments to convince them of the truth of what has been advanced.

Who knows not that the Latin word virtus would in many instances, be but weakly not to say improperly rendered by the English word virtue; as that word, in Roman authors, comes often nearer the import of what we call valor or fortitude, sometimes even brute force? We should not readily ascribe virtue to wild beasts; yet Tacitus so applies the term virtus :-" Fera animalia, si clausa teneas, virtutis obliviscuntur." And if some of our words have too great latitude of signification to answer always to their Latin etymons, some have, on the contrary, too little. For example, the English word temperance is too confined in meaning to answer to the Latin temperantia, which implies moderation in every desire, and is defined by Cicero, in one place, "Moderatio cupiditatum rationi obediens ;"* and in another, "Temperantia est quæ in rebus aut expetendis aut fugiendis, rationem ut sequamur, monet."+ Now all that is implied in the English word is almost only that species which he denominates "temperantia in victu." And, though the differences may not be so considerable in all the other related words above-mentioned, it were easy to show that they cannot, in every instance, be made to tally.

It requires, indeed, but a very small skill in languages to enable us to discover, that etymology is often a very unsafe guide to the proper acceptation of a term. It will not be doubted that the Latin word sobrius is the root of the English word sober, and their term honestum of our term honesty; but every body knows that the related words in the two languages will not always answer to each other. Nay, to show, in the strongest manner, how much more difficult it is, than is commonly imagined, to apprehend the precise import and proper application of words of this order in dead languages, I shall transcribe a short passage from the fourth book of De Finibus, l. i.

* De Finibus, l. ii.