and' video;' but had Mr. Webster, in truth, known the Russian infinitive of 'to see,' to be 'vidit,' how much more resemblance and correctness would he not have found between the Russian vidit and the latın 'videre' or 'video?' In the same paragraph, the author states, that the Russian 'Zavidayu' (I do envy) 'to envy,' is derived from 'vid,' visage; here he again commits another fault: 'vid' in Russian, is sight, and is coincident with the infinitive ‘vidit,' but 'visage' is rendered in Russian by 'litz,' and he will have much difficulty in finding a resemblance be→ tween 'litz' and 'Zavidayu!' 2. Mr. Webster's commentary on his meaning, respecting the Russian 'so' or 'ees,' puts him in a greater dilemma than before; he says: that in the sentence "he is as large as I am," French "il est aussi grand que moi," the Russian' ees' stands for the English' as' and the French 'aussi.'” Why did the author not render this sentence also into Russian, in order to shew the analogy? The Russian 'ees' is never used as an adverb, and is but a preposition, signifying with; for instance, "he was with me,” is rendered in Russian, "on bil ees mnoyu." "I came with him ;" in Russian, "ia ees nim prishol," &c.; but the comparitional adverb in the above sentence of Mr. Webster's, is rendered in Russian by 'tak' and 'kak,' and the sentence, "he is as large as I am," would be rendered into Russian by on tak bolski kak ia." The author, in his Dictionary, says, that 'so' (or ees) signifies in Russian, with, of, from; here again he has confounded the Russian 'ees,' which is spelled in Russian with an s and a silent e, and signifies as above remarked 'with,' with the Russian iz, spelled with -Z (Russian Zemla) and a silent e, which signifies of, from, and is of a Polish origin); as for instance, "he came from Paris,' ," "on priyehhal iz (not ces) Pariza ;" of and from are also rendered in Russian by 'ot' but never' ees,' as for instance, "from Rome to Lyons," in Russian, "ot Rima do Liona." &c. 3. We again repeat our challenge, that Mr. Webster will be so kind as to specify the two languages in which he wishes us to point out similar words; he speaks in his letter in such an obscure way of "languages radically distinct," that we are afraid again to be involved in a tedious dispute with him about the distinction of radicals, instead of the similarity of words in the languages, especially, as he well knows, that our views about languages and their study, are radically distinct. 4. The word "binnen land," is found in no classical author. The distinction in the use of 'binnen' and 'innerhalb,' is rendered clearly in Schiller's Fiesco, Third Act, "Binnen 10 tagen findest "Du sie innerhalb janer Mauern!" English, within 10 days, you'll find her within those walls,' here the first within' is rendered by binnen,' and the last by innerhalb;" the same distinction is also made in all the German grammars, especially in Adelung's and Heinsius. The author also ought to be aware that a dictionary is but an index of its respective grammar, and that it gives all possible, even the least used and most remote significations of a word, which the grammar teaches, when and how to use; the French word par, for instance, is rendered in English, by, through, is there any reason to confound these two words, because they are confounded in the dictionary? Is it the same thing to say: I came by and through the stage? Thus, our author has found in Castle's Arabic Dictionary, some significations besides, clearly and evidently, and has taken no trouble to study the grammar, in order to know when to make use of them; see Sacy's Arabic Grammar, vol. i. of the prepositions; thus 'dulaul baynan,' Alcoran. 5, and 'uz dahhil,' ibid, 8. The author is astonished that baynan should be derived from ayin; has he forgotten, or better does he not know, that 'aenan' is in Arabic indisputable, certain, clear, evident, hence the expression in Hhalfitz, lufzut aenan drukir,' English, expressions clear and dear.' 5. Mr. W. will expressly maintain that in the German word 'glaube,' the g is a prefix! Let us ask him one question: the word laube is feminine gender in German, now according to the rules of the German grammar, any substantive prefixed with a g becomes neuter, as for instance, 'wolke' (cloud) is feminine gender, but 'gewolke' is neuter; 'Raum,' is masculine, but 'geraeum,' neuter. 'Sprache,' feminine, 'gespraech,' neuter, &c. Now if the g in 'glaube' be a real prefix, whence does it come that 'glaube' is, in German, masculine, contrary to all grammatical rules? Whence the suppression of the e, why is it not spelled gelaube like geloben, to vow? What evidence has Mr. W. for the German glaube being derived from the Saxon geleaf? Are all the German words derived from the Saxon? That because the English have made from 'gleich' like, and from 'glueck' luck, therefore the g in the German glaube is a prefix, is by no means conclusive! There is no German word luck; leiche is a German word, and signifies the breeding of fish, and we greatly doubt if Mr. Webster will be able to find out by his thirty year's labour and twenty Dictionaries, any analogy between the meanings alike, even, and the breeding of fish. 8. Mr. Webster translates the Russian na primir' after a model ;' here he again mistook the meaning, which is, ' in the first instance ;' in German, fuer's erste.' Now what has 'na' to do with 'fuer,' or 'za' with 'auf, fuer, nach, &c? 'Model' in Russian, is, 'obrazets;' besides, in the expressions nachgeben, nachlassen, which signify a separation, removal, have they also the meaning of an approach? The expression "Tausend Jahre nach der Geburt Christi," has it also the signification of an approach? 6. That vor is sometimes used in German as a particle, is not true; even when in composition with a verb, it always retains its primitive and distinct meaning as a preposition, so that the whole verb governs the same case which the preposition of itself would indicate, and active verbs are by these means turned to neuter ones, and vice versa, as for instance, jagen,' to hunt, chase, is an active verb, but when in composition with 'nach,' it becomes neuter, on account of the preposition ‘nach' which always governs the dative, and therefore we say: 'seinem (not seinen) Schatten nach jagen'—the same is with 'vor-arbeiten,' ‘vor-machen, 'vor-schreiben,' &c. Why does the author elude our remark on his assertion in his dictionary: "But in German and Dutch the preposition ver," &c.—that ver is in German no preposition, but a mere particle? 7. Avrí in Greek, when used as a preposition, has the meaning, but, for, upon account of, for the sake of—Matt. v. 38, xvii. 27, John i. 16, Luke xi. 15, and many others places; it is really the first time we have ever heard that instead of or for express an opposition or contrariety! The Latin anter, signifies no opposition, but before-as we have remarked in our article in the 10th number of the Southern Review-quite differently it is in composition where it really denotes an opposition, as in avisnu to stand against, oppose, &c.; that avr in itself, has no meaning of opposition, is evident from Luke i. 20, xix. 44, Acts xi. 23, where it denotes because, and we doubt if the author will be ingenious (not to say correct) enough to turn because into an opposition. 9. The author here is getting angry, and deals in personalities instead of arguments-we will decline all reply to such expressions, and only say with Ovid "Nou ego mordaci distrinxi carmine quenquam." He wishes to know his incorrectnesses in the Danish and German, and he shall have them. The author says, "that u in Danish, the Swedish o, is a prefix equivalent to in, and is used as a privative or negative," &c. Why does the author here again confound the grammatical distinctions between the preposition u, which is a word in itself, and is pronounced short, and signifies in, and the prefix u abbreviated from the syllable un, is German, and therefore pronounced long: as for instance, uaabned is nothing but abbreviated unaabned; German, ungeoeffnet, unopened; uaedel, is an abbreviation of unaedel; German, unedel, mean, ignoble, &c. The author also says that paa, is in Danish "on, upon, in"-how will he translate "en fesl paa den anden?" Does it not signify after? "igien," in Danish, the author says, is also against; this is not true, it has always the meaning, back or return-his example igienkalder," is not to countermand, as he says, but to call back, as for instance: leg wil laere ham at gienkalde sine ord.' 'I will teach him to call, take back his word." Til, in Danish, the author says, is a prefir; are til middag, about noon, til natten, at night, also prefixes? are they not real adverbs? Ent, in German, the author says, denotes from, out, away; how will he translate these expressions: "seinem Wunsche entspreechen?" "mich fuer meine Muche entschaedigen?" Er, he again says denotes in German, without, out, or to; how will he translate "ich werde nicht ermangeln?" how will he translate "er erkrankte diesen Morgen?" or this phrase, "er erbrach meinen Brief?” If Mr. W. is not satisfied with these suggested faults, he has only to command and we are ready to serve him with more; it is our misfortune that in his dictionary he mentioned but a few specimens of his knowledge of these languages, and we are unable to suggest more instances than he has specified; still the few are sufficient to prove that he studied these languages only by dictionaries, so that we find it necessary to repeat "that the mere aid of dictionaries, without grammatical knowledge, leads the inquirers to conclusions which often are equally absurd and delusive." To his last remark in his letter, we will say: "Bene colligitur haec pueris et mulierculis et servis et servorum simillimis esse grata; gravi vero homini et ea quae fiunt judicio certo ponderanti, probari posse nullo modo." SOUTHERN REVIEW. NO. XII. NOVEMBER, 1830. ART. I.-1. The Constitution of Man considered in relation to external objects. By GEORGE COMBE. Edinburgh. 1818. 2. Essays on Phrenology; or, an Inquiry into the principles and utility of the System of Drs. Gall and Spurzheim, and into the objections made against it. By GEORGE COMBE. Edinburgh. SHAKSPEARE has divided human life into seven ages, and given, in a few poetical lines, a highly graphic sketch of the physical progress, from puling infancy, to drivelling dotage. But neither poet nor philosopher has, hitherto, so far as we are aware, described minutely the gradations of intellectual existence, deterred perhaps by the difficulty of fixing the everchanging impressions of the varying passions and emotions which from time to time stamp their peculiarities upon the character and conduct. To know man as he is; to measure all his powers; to estimate fully his capacities, we must begin by tracing the first lines of mental developement, we should watch the soul as it buds forth in the earliest spring-time of being, then closely observing its modes and degrees of expansion, we should note the withering of its petals, the fading away of its brilliant colouring, and linger over the last exhalations of its departing fragrance. We do not propose at present to attempt a task of such delicacy, but will merely employ the brief space allotted to us, in sketching a few of the most prominent features of the mind as they display themselves at the several successive periods of life; leaving it to more attentive and able observers to fill up the extensive outline. VOL. VI. NO. 12. 34 It would detain us long, and indeed to little purpose, to enter into the discussion of the hackneyed question, whether the soul or mind be a something superadded to our physical structure, or an essentially constituent portion of that structure; it shall suffice to acknowledge the connexion between them, whether identical or contrasted in their natures, to be so close, and indissoluble, that all attempts to disjoin them, even in imagination, must prove entirely abortive. The music may not reside in the string, but without its vibration there can be no melody. He We must take leave, however, to express the opinion, contrary to the doctrines taught by some of the most talented and ingenious writers of the present day, that mental power is not simply the result of physical organization. We readily admit that the hand of the Creator has bound them together inseparably, though not in the relation of cause and effect. Imperfect organization unquestionably implies, always, imperfection of intellect. The one increases and is developed as the other grows and attains strength and maturity, until the two are exhibited in the highest condition of excellence and vigour. It was a debate worthy of the schoolmen and may be set aside with their other lucubrations, at what period the earliest manifestations of soul or thought were given forth by the embryo or infant. At birth, we can scarcely regard the future man as any thing better than a vegetable; nay Alfieri has applied the phrase "Pianta-Uomo,” "Plant Man," to the same being even in the adult state. is sensible, but as far as we can judge, sensible only to painful impressions-hunger, thirst, and fatigue oppress him, and it may be taken as an evil omen of his coming existence that his first felt passion is one of the most uneasy and depressing of all those to which he is to be a prey. He fears. He has entered a scene of suffering and sorrow; to fit him for the avoidance of the causes of evil, he is early gifted with the impulse of terror. Shout near him--he screams alarmed. Seem to let him fallhe throws out his little hands and convulsively catches for support. He is also the subject of desire. The sensation of hunger, if we may use such an expression, is born with him, and he appears to be inspired with a knowledge of the mode by which he is to relieve it-he needs no lesson to teach him how to derive his food from its gentle sources-"the sacred fountains that nourish the human race." The voluntary actions by which he effects this are said to be instinctive, but we have not affixed to this term a meaning sufficiently clear and precise. Is it intended that they are in any sense mechanical? are they, on the other hand, intelligent? or must we resort to the supposition, that they are intermediate, or of a peculiar nature? Actions of |