Chapter V: Book 5: , chap. 2, Page 403—Account of a new compound Microscope for (4)

18. Notwithstanding the perfect manner in which the chlorine may be thus separated by crystallization and slow evaporation to dryness, yet it is certain that by quick evaporation a [p091] substance apparently quite dry may be obtained, which yet possesses strong bleaching power. In one experiment, where, of two equal portions, one had been evaporated in the course of twenty-four hours to dryness upon the warm part of a sandbath, when compared with the former, it had not lost more than one-third of its bleaching power.

19. With the desire of knowing what effect carbonic acid would have on Labarraque’s fluid, and whether it possessed in a greater or smaller degree the power of ordinary acids to expel the chlorine, portions of the solution were put into two Woulfe’s bottles, and a current of carbonic acid gas passed through them. The gas was obtained from sulphuric acid and whitening in a soda-water apparatus, and was well washed in water. The stream of gas brought away small portions of chlorine with it, but they were not sensible to the smell, and could only be detected by putting litmus paper into the current. An immense quantity of gas, equal to nearly 1300 times the volume of the fluid, was sent through; but yet very little chlorine was removed, and the bleaching powers of the fluid were but little diminished, though it no longer appeared alkaline to turmeric paper. Air was then passed through the solution in large quantity; it also removed chlorine, but apparently not quite so much as carbonic acid.

20. One other experiment was made upon the degree in which the carbonate of soda in Labarraque’s liquor resisted decomposition by the chlorine, even at high temperature. Two equal portions of the fluid were taken, and one of them boiled rapidly for fifteen minutes; both were then acted upon by sulphuric acid, blowing, and heat, as described (11), and the two were then tested by nitrate of silver, to ascertain the quantity of chlorine remaining: it was nearly three times as much in the boiled as in the unboiled portion; and by comparing this with the results before obtained (11), it will be seen that, after boiling for a quarter of an hour, not more than a twentieth part of the chlorine had acted upon the alkali, to form chloride and chlorate.

21. It would seem as if I were unacquainted with Dr. Granville’s paper upon this subject, published in the last volume of this Journal, p. 371, were I to close my remarks without taking [p092] any notice of it. Unfortunately, Dr. Granville has mistaken M. Labarraque’s direction, and by passing chlorine, to “complete saturation,” through the carbonate, instead of using the quantities directed, has failed in obtaining Labarraque’s really curious and very important liquid; to which, in consequence, not one of his observations or experiments applies, although the latter are quite correct in themselves.

_Royal Institution, Sept. 3, 1827_.

FOOTNOTES:

[31] See the last volume of this Journal, pp. 211, 460.

[32] See Vol. I. of this Journal, p. 461; and _Phil. Mag._ N. S., I. 376.

HIEROGLYPHICAL FRAGMENTS; _with some Remarks on_ ENGLISH GRAMMAR. _In a Letter to the Baron William Von_ HUMBOLDT. By a Correspondent.

My dear Sir,

I am happy to tell you that our prospects of new documents from Egypt are very rapidly increasing: Mr. Burton has had the good fortune to discover at length, in a mosque, the triple inscription for which he has been some years in search; and he has been negotiating with the Pacha for its removal. From its magnitude and state of preservation, there is every reason to believe that it will rival the pillar of Rosetta in its importance, and I sincerely hope that it will tend to check the wildness of conjecture, which has been rioting without bounds in the regions of Egyptian literature. Mr. Tattam is printing a Coptic grammar, and I am preparing an Appendix, which is to contain the rudiments of an Enchorial Lexicon: I ardently wish that Mr. Burton’s inscriptions may come to my assistance before I complete it. I have received nothing from France or from Germany for these four years past: even what is published seems by some fatality to have been withheld from me; and the booksellers send no answers to my commissions. I trust your brother will not forget his kind promise to think of me at Berlin.

I have to thank him and you for your obliging present of your _Letter to Abel Remusat on the Genius of the Chinese Language_, which has greatly interested me: the best return that I can make will be to give you some remarks which have occurred to me on the language of hieroglyphics in general, [p093] and on the character of the English language, which seems to approach, in its simplicity, as you have yourself observed, to the natural structure of the oldest languages, immediately related to the hieroglyphical form of representation. I fear, however, that I must apologize to you for the want of method with which I shall be obliged at present to throw my fragments together: but it may be allowable to make some difference between a letter and a finished essay.

Hieroglyphics, in their primitive form, are scarcely to be considered in any case as simply a mode of expressing an oral language: they may be a direct and independent representation of our thoughts, that is, of recollections, or sentiments, or intentions, collateral to the representation of the same thoughts by the language of sounds. We find, in many of the Egyptian monuments, a double expression of the same sense: first, a simple picture, for instance, of a votary presenting a vase to a sitting deity; each characterized by some peculiarity of form, and each distinguished also by a name written over him; and this may be called a pure hieroglyphical representation, though it scarcely amounts to a language, any more than the look of love is a language of a lover. But we universally find that the tablet is accompanied by a greater variety of characters which certainly do constitute a language, although we know little or nothing of the sounds of that language; but its import is, that “such a king offers a vase to the deity;” and on the other side, that “the deity grants to the king health and strength, and beauty and riches, and dominion and power.” It is common to see, in these inscriptions, a number of characters introduced, which are evidently identical with some of those in the tablets: and however some of them may occasionally have been employed phonetically, there can be no question of the nature of the changes which their employment must have gone through before they assumed the character of sounds: but this is altogether a separate consideration, and foreign to the present purpose.

Now it is obvious that objects, delineated with the intention of representing the originals to the eye by their form, must necessarily be nouns substantive; and that the picture, containing no verb whatever, can scarcely be said to constitute [p094] either a positive or a negative assertion. At the same time, it must be allowed that a picture of King George the Fourth’s coronation, with the date 19 July 1821, could scarcely be considered otherwise than as asserting a historical truth; and if any emblem of Truth were attached to it, or if it were deposited among the records of other historical facts, it would be equivalent to the expression, “George IV. crowned in July 1821,” which _scarcely_ wants the verb _was_ to convert it into a positive assertion of a fact.

Strictly speaking, however, there seems to be no direct mode of supplying the want of the verb _is_ or _was_ in pure hieroglyphical writing; and if any such sign was employed in the Egyptian or the old Chinese hieroglyphics, its introduction must have been arbitrary or conventional; like the employment of a postulate in mathematics. Every other part of a language appears capable of being reduced, with more or less circumlocution, to the form of a noun substantive; and the English language appears to approach to the Chinese in the facility with which all the forms of grammar may be shaken off.

There is, however, often occasion, in such cases, for a certain degree of metaphor approaching to poetical latitude; and hence it may happen that the least literary nations are sometimes the most poetical. It is, in fact, impossible to exclude metaphor altogether from the most prosaic language; and it is frequently difficult to say where metaphor ends and strict logical prose begins; but by degrees the metaphor drops, and the simple figurative sense is retained. Thus we may say _liquid ruby_ with the same exact meaning as _crimson wine_; and yet _ruby_ would never be called an adjective, though employed merely to express the colour: in _coral lips_, however, the _coral_, first used metaphorically, is converted by habit into an adjective, and the expression is considered as synonymous with _labri corallini_.

The general custom in English is to place the figurative substantive, used as an adjective by comparison, or by abstraction, before the name which retains its proper sense: thus a chestnut horse is a chestnut like or chestnut coloured horse; a horse chestnut is a coarse kind of chestnut: and in this manner we are enabled to use almost every English noun substantive as an adjective, by an ellipsis of the word _like_, which, [p095] if inserted entire or abridged, would make a real adjective of the word, as war_like_, friend_ly_. But this omission of the termination, like other figures of speech, is easily forgotten in the ordinary forms of language; and the Germans, as well as the English, make use of almost all their substantives in the place of adjectives, though they are more in the habit of continuing them into single long words. When, however, the substantives are so used, they generally become by abstraction real adjectives: for we seldom think of a _chestnut_, in speaking of the colour of a horse; but the idea of a light brown coat, with an ugly pale-red mane and tail, and a fidgety temper, is very likely to occur to us: and in a horse chestnut the idea of a horse is out of the question; we only think of a coarse fruit which a man cannot eat: so that the true sense, in both these instances, is that of a quality; but _coral lips_ and _ivory hands_ are rather elliptical expressions, composed of two substantives, which might fairly be represented hieroglyphically by the assistance of a branch of coral and an elephant’s tusk. But to describe an abstract quality by any hieroglyphic character, representative of form only, would be generally impossible: colours might be imitated, if we supposed coloured figures to be employed; but other simple ideas, such as those of sound or touch, could never be immediately presented to the eye; and some circuitous invention would always be required for their representation.

Horne Tooke has shewn, with considerable felicity of illustration, that all the parts of speech may be resolved into the noun and the verb; but he has not pointed out so clearly that every verb may be resolved into a noun and the single primitive verb is or was, which, in this sense, may be said to be the only essential verb in any language; as we find, indeed, in the Coptic, that almost every noun becomes a verb, either by the addition of PE, or sometimes even without it. Thus, _the morning_ BLUSHES is synonymous with _the morning_ IS _red_; _he loves justice_, with _he_ IS _a lover of justice_; and _I_ AM _an Englishman_, with _the person now speaking_ IS _an Englishman_. But this must be understood of is, was, or will be, in all its tenses; the idea of time, if expressed, being an essential part of the verbal sense.

I confess that some of these reflections have occurred to me in looking over a very singular work, which I had the curiosity [p096] to take up, in order to see what kind of information could be possessed by a person notoriously and professedly ignorant of the origin and relations of the language which he attempts to teach; and, in short, what kind of light could be diffused by an apostle of darkness. Blunders, and some of them ridiculous enough, must, of course, be found in the works of such a person, but most of them are such as every schoolboy might correct; and there really is so much of sagacity in some of Mr. Cobbett’s remarks on the errors of others, that they well deserve the attention of such as are ambitious to write or speak with perfect accuracy.

I shall not attempt to enter into a regular criticism of this _Grammar_; I shall merely make a few miscellaneous observations, as they have occurred to me in reading it, several of which would be equally applicable to the best of the existing works of a similar nature.

In Letter III we are told that _long_ and _short_, though adjectives, do not express _qualities_, but merely dimension or duration; from a singular misconception of the proper sense of the word _quality_. We find, in Letter IV, the rule given by most grammarians, though not by all, that the article A becomes AN, when it is followed by any word beginning with a vowel; but it is surely more natural to follow the sound than the spelling, and, as we should never think of saying an _youthful_ bride, it seems equally incorrect to say an _useful_ piece of furniture; for the initial sound is precisely the same. In the same manner A _unit_ and A _European_, seems to sound more agreeable than AN; and the best speakers appear to adopt this custom.