a

as in the early Castilian texts. The Castilian development then is only an extension of a well-known phenomenon in Latin in so far as the frequency of interchange is concerned. As for the early fall of the h- <f- it is only an extension of the parallel development of Oscan h- < Indo-European gh

In $43 we have further evidence for the linguistic unity of Spain up to the end of the Visigothic period. The initial groups cl-, fl, pl,

, remain unchanged in the entire Hispanic territory up to the end of the tenth century. The Castilian palatalization begins in the eleventh century. It may have begun earlier, Menéndez Pidal believes, but if so it was apparently considered too plebeian and avoided in writing just as -illo <-iello < -ěllu had been during the eleventh and twelfth centuries.

In $845–6 the Vulgar Latin forms with voiced intervocalic consonants and posttonic and pretonic vowels retained found in Leon in the tenth century are studied again. Many of these are studied in $832-4. In 888 the problem is treated again. We are face to face with a Leonese Vulgar Latin preserved since Visigothic times thanks to the presence and influence of Mozarabic scribes.

The development of medietāte in Spanish has a chapter all by itself, $48. Meatad predominates in Castile, meetad in Leon. Meitad is frequent in Castile and Aragon, and the modern Castilian mitad is apparently Aragonese. The presence of t is explained as a learned influence.

In $51 we have a fascinating study of the development of the groups -ct-,-lt-, to-it-in Leon, Aragon, and Navarre; and to-ič-> <- in Castile. The extreme development was reached in Castile in the eleventh century because in the Glosas Emilianenses and Silenses -it- is still found, feito, muito. Menéndez Pidal does not consider these as really Castilian forms but rather as Castilian archaisms, also preserved in Toledo as late as the twelfth century. In Mozarabic our author finds evidence for the more archaic -ht- from -ct-, the Oscan-Umbrian stage of Italic and Latin -ct-, and also -it-, the Umbrian stage of secondary -ct-. The general Romance development is apparently parallel to the Oscan

7

Sommer, op. cit. 9114. It may be that the original Latin bilabial f remained in some of the Romance territory despite the objections of some philologists. See Grandgent, Vulgar Latin, $320. Lindsay, The Latin Language 99, believes that Latin f was at some time bilabial. He is wrong, of course, when he states that f is bilabial in modern Spanish. It is true only for certain dialects. See my Studies in New Mexican Spanish, I $100.

Umbrian and may be related to it. If in Mozarabic one still finds the Oscan stage -ht- < -ct- Castilian must have developed with marvellous rapidity to reach the - če <-it-stage in the eleventh century.

The Castilian developments mb > mm > m, nd > nn > n, ld > ll > 1, lt > ld, discussed in $$52-4, Menéndez Pidal believes to be of Oscan origin. He finds that these Castilian developments irradiate from the territory around Huesca, < Osca, the city of the Oscans founded by Sertorius. This region is east of and in general an extension of the original Castilian Cantabria whence f-> h- irradiates, and for that reason the reviewer believes that the evolution of that phenomenon may be also of Oscan source. The Oscan source of mb > mm > m, nd > nn >n seems definitely established. The comparative linguistic map of page 304 leaves no room for doubt.

In $58 we have another chapter of the utmost importance for Romance linguistics, the problem of the development of secondary Romance groups, such as m'n > mr > mbr in Castilian. This is of course not limited to Romance philology. As for Spanish the general problem is how it happens that original Latin mn becomes nn > ñ in Castilian while secondary m'n becomes mr > mbr. Not counting the common form omne < hómine, mbr prevails in Castile in the tenth and eleventh centuries (93% of all cases). The opinion expressed for the difference in the development of primary mn >ñ and secondary m'n > mr > mbr in Castile, namely, that in the original Latin mn, as in original pt, the tendency to assimilation, mn > nn > n, pt > tt > t, is explained by the weak articulation of consonants long juxtaposed, whereas in the case of secondary m'n there is recent vocalic syncope with necessary emphatic and clear pronunciation of the two constituent elements and dissimilation favored, m'n > mr > mbr, is certainly more attractive than that of Millardet who thought of an anti-etymological and unphonetic syllabication, no-mne;' but it is not absolutely convincing for Leon and other Romance languages and dialects, where secondary m'n, for example, develops through assimilation to m, and it is precisely in Leon also that the hiatus between the two consonants was more pronounced if we are to believe that the numerous tenth century forms with the posttonic and pretonic vowels preserved are really examples of popular pronunciation.

In $861-80 Menéndez Pidal studies the morphological and syntactical problems of the early Spanish texts. It is not possible to review these studies in the present article. The new forms, such as tan mientre <

Linguistique et dialectologie romanes, Montpellier, 1923, pp. 293–6.

8

tam interim, algo[n]dre < aliunde, ad abiesas < ad avèrsa, yestra, gestra <ěxtra, adta < Arabic hatta, etc., are of fascinating interest to Romance philology.

The chapters devoted to lexicology, 8881-5, and the final historical, geographical and linguistic studies of the various regions and epochs of Spain from the eighth to the tenth centuries deserve special and separate reviews which we cannot undertake now.

Origenes del español is not only a work of capital importance for the study of Romance philology and epoch-making for Spanish historical grammar. It may be justly called one of the outstanding contributions made to the science of general linguistics during the last twenty-five years. It is to be hoped that Menéndez Pidal may have the time and health to finish soon his monumental Historia de la lengua española for which the present work is, as the author tells us in the preface, only an introduction.

AURELIO M. ESPINOSA

Le Mystère du Langage; les sons primitifs et leurs évolutions. Pp. 102. By CHARLES CALLET. Paris: Maisonneuve Frères, 1926.

The author claims to have examined a great number of languages, and says (p. 6): "J'ai pu remonter jusqu'à la bouche même de l'Hominien, retrouver les cris qu'il jetait, alors qu'il n'était encore qu'un animal; déterminer le premier sens de ses cris, lorsqu'il se dégagea de l'animalité et que les cris devinrent des mots; déterminer la raison profonde de leurs dérivations, alors, j'ai vu couler, lumineux, tragique, fatal, le large fleuve des vocables'. So (pp. 8–9) we find that all language starts from nasalized snarling, bellowing, whistling, and guttural snarling, characterized by the sounds gny ny, m, sy, r k gre respectively. For example (pp. 14-15), ny = tooth explains na = light, because of the glittering whiteness of the tooth. Whereupon we receive a truly large fleuve de vocables, continuing with but slight islands of explanatory text, until we reach the concluding chapter of two pages. Examples are drawn from indigenous languages of Canada and of Peru, from Sudanese and Senegambian dialects, from Annamite and Malay, from Chinese and Japanese, Magyar, Hebrew, Assyrian, etc. Of languages familiar to the reviewer, there are Sanskrit, Greek, and Latin: in which the words appear freely misspelled. Three successive examples of Latin on p. 45 are 'Silio = avoir soif, sabaya = boisson, sabazies = fêtes de

, Bacchus'. And when on p. 29 he finds: 'Nava = næuf (sic!), nouveau (grec neos; islandais, nua). Ces mots se rapportent au bourgeon qui

pointe et déchire l'écorce, à l'enfant qui naît, d'où le latin nascere (sic!), natus', he concludes that this brochure is a warning against the self-made polyglot. For its author is certainly what the French neatly term an autodidacte, if only he were -didacte at all. But then the treatise is merely the latest of a long line of such treatises; if only it could be the last!

ROLAND G. KENT

NOTES AND PERSONALIA

Oliver Farrar Emerson, a Signer of the Call that led to the foundation of the LINGUISTIC SOCIETY OF AMERICA, and a Foundation Member of the same, died at Ocala, Florida, on March 13.

He was born on May 24, 1860 near Traer, Iowa, and received his baccalaureate from Iowa College in 1882. After experience as teacher and superintendent in the schools of his native state, he went to Cornell University as Goldwin Smith Fellow in 1888, and remained as instructor in English, earning the degree of Ph.D. in 1891. From 1892 to 1896 he was Assistant Professor of Rhetoric and English Philology at Cornell, and then accepted a call to the Western Reserve University as Professor of English. This position he held until the time of his death. In February of the present year he received a leave of absence on account of his health, and went to Florida, but his condition became worse, until the end on March 13.

Professor Emerson was the author of a number of works on the history of the English language and of a Middle English Reader, as well as of many shorter articles; he had edited also a number of texts. He was a member of many scientific societies, among them the Modern Language Association of America, of which he was president in 1923; the American Dialect Society, of which he was secretary 1900-05 and president 1906-09; the Modern Humanities Research Association, of which he was vice-president 1920. He was active in the LINGUISTIC SOCIETY OF AMERICA from its start, being not merely a Signer of the Call and a Foundation Member, but one of the Executive Committee for 1925, and the Vice-President for 1926; in the latter capacity it fell to his lot to preside over the sessions of the Society at Cambridge. All who were in attendance will recall his rich scholarship and his gracious personality, and will regret the loss which they themselves have suffered personally, in addition to the loss suffered by the Society.

a

The American Council of Learned Societies has granted $10,000.00 a year for five years, beginning with 1927, for the recording and investigation of American Indian Languages. The expenditure of this money will be directed by a committee which, for the present, consists of Pro