owned but one language and one nationality-the language and nationality of France.

§ 21. The French of the seventeenth century owed its merits, in great measure, to a victorious and absolute monarchy, and to a court always brilliant and latterly religious. Unfortunately, its finest qualities were at last exaggerated into defects: nobility of expression merged into pomposity, and precision degenerated into stiffness. The authors of the eighteenth century cast off this oppressive majesty, this theatrical rigidity, and clothed the language with new attributes. After the death of Louis XIV., the very foundations of society seemed to crumble away, and a flood of misfortunes to pour in upon France. The people in vain sought for some authority to which they could worthily submit. A new power arose-the power of the pen. Till then it had seemed as if letters existed only for the pleasure and luxury of the rich; but the writers of the eighteenth century, no longer content to please, called all authorities to account before them, and questioned all received ideas. French became the language of politics, as well as of imagination and poetry.

The genius of Voltaire, sparkling with wit, though wanting in depth, seemed to hover over the century: philosopher, poet, historian, this active and fertile mind adapted the language to every purpose, and gave it greater ease and simplicity. But perhaps J. J. Rousseau made a still deeper impress on it than even Voltaire. Artistic feeling and poetic insight enabled him to mould the formal style of the preceding century into a vehicle for expressing his admiration of the simplest works of nature. His prose cannot be too highly valued for its delightful melody and harmonious flow.

§ 22. In our brief sketch of the French language, and its bearing upon literature, we have arrived at our own times. Now as before we can trace in it the influence of the moral and political changes which have taken place. Under the first empire, when liberty of thought was no longer possible, and the literature was but a servile imita

tion of that of the seventeenth century, the language which had expressed the boldest thoughts and aspirations of freedom, sank lifeless under the old forms to which it was made to return, and no work of genius was produced in the country.* The Restoration came, and with it France seemed to breathe again. Poets and writers arose on all sides, and made this the most brilliant period of the century. The philosophical school of the eighteenth century, in its attack upon all current tradition, had respected nothing but the national language and literature. The Romantic school of the nineteenth century tried to destroy the only remaining authority of the past, that of the classical and traditional forms of literary composition. They partially succeeded, but the struggle still goes on between the Romantists and Classicists, between movement and rest.

Various other influences have been at work on the language during this century, and need a passing notice. We have first the novels which have formed so large a part of the writings of the last fifty years. In their train follows a class whose influence is painfully real, that of mercenary writers, who to win popularity sacrifice to the corrupt tastes of the multitude, and do not disdain to reproduce the thoughts and phrases of the lowest stratum of society. These are the faithful representatives of luxury, pleasure, and all the weaknesses of our age. Happily, side by side with them are numerous talented and thoughtful men, who seek truth for its own sake, and in whose writings the first qualities of the French language, clearness and precision, are manifest. Let us hope that they may more than counteract the evil.

Two other great influences are at work on the language, that of journalism and the large influx of foreign words brought into French by international intercourse. ($ 35, 36.)

Lastly, we have that class of men who devote themselves to philological researches. Never has the language been so carefully traced back to its original sources as in our day; never has it been made the subject of such careful investiga

* Châteaubriand, Madame de Staël, and Le Maistre wrote in exile.

tion. There is no doubt that these studies, as yet in their infancy, will influence the language in the right direction. Writers who have learnt the history of their own language cannot without injury to themselves, and to the interests of their country, lose sight of the glorious heritage which has been left them by the genius of France.

NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS.

§ 23. Synthetic and Analytic Languages.*-A language which depends much upon inflexion, and less upon the position of the words, is said to be 'synthetic.' Latin is synthetic. A language which depends little upon inflexions, and much upon the position of words, is said to be 'analytic.' Modern French is analytic. Old French holds a place between these two, and may be conveniently called semi-synthetic. (§ 3.)

That Old French is more analytic than Latin is mainly seen in1. The use of the article.

2. The greater use of tense auxiliaries.

3. The greater use of prepositions instead of case endings. 4. The greater use of pronouns with verbs, etc.

That Modern French is more analytic than Old French is mainly seen in

1. The total absence of case endings in substantives and adjectives, and the general use of prepositions.

2. The greater importance of the order of the words in the

sentence.

§ 24. Popular and Low Latin. (§ 6.)-For a list of Latin words in popular use in classical times and in late Latin, which have left traces in one or more of the Romance languages, see Diez, pp. 5-30, vol. i.

To Popular Latin the term 'low' has been often misapplied. The following extracts will explain the difference :-"L'invasion barbare est l'événement qui consacre d'une façon irrévocable la scission des deux idiomes: le latin vulgaire, maître de la Gaule, et tout près de donner naissance au français; le latin littéraire, incompréhensible au peuple, langue morte confinée désormais dans le domaine des savants et qui n'aura aucune influence sur la formation de nos langues modernes. Par Grégoire de Tours, par Frédégaire, par la renaissance de Charlemagne, par la scholastique du moyen âge, le latin se perpétua dans les usages savants, et retrouva au seizième siècle comme une sorte de resurrection artificielle : il est encore de nos jours la langue de

*On this subject see "Students' English Language," Lectures xvi. and xvii,

l'Eglise catholique, et jusqu'à ces dernières années il était, surtout en Allemagne, la langue des savants. Après l'invasion, sous les Mérovingiens, les fonctionnaires publics, les notaires, le clergé, trop ignorants pour écrire correctement le latin littéraire, méprisant trop le latin vulgaire pour l'employer dans leurs actes, jaloux d'ailleurs d'imiter le beau style des fonctionnaires romains, écrivaient dans " une sorte de jargon véritablement barbare qui n'est point le latin classique, qui n'est pas non plus la langue vulgaire, mais où ces deux éléments sont étrangement amalgamés, la proportion du second croissant en raison directe de l'ignorance du scribe." (Meyer.)

"C'est ce jargon barbare qu'on appelle le bas-latin. Il a été la langue de l'administration française pendant toute la durée du moyen âge, jusqu'en 1539, où François 1er ordonna d'écrire tous les actes en langue française. Le lecteur voit maintenant, et d'une façon nette, la différence du bas-latin et du latin vulgaire ; l'un est la langue naturelle du peuple, l'autre n'est qu'une imitation, grossière et stérile, de la belle langue littéraire romaine. Le latin vulgaire a produit le français, le bas-latin n'a rien produit du tout, et n'a point eu d'influence sur la formation de notre langue. Cette distinction est capitale. A côté du latin classique, du latin vulgaire, du bas-latin (mélange de l'un et de l'autre), il est encore une seconde espèce de bas-latin, postérieure au huitième, même au dixième siècle, je veux dire le latin du moyen âge, reproduction servile du mot français (on en trouvera des exemples dans ce livre); ainsi missaticum avait donné message: les clercs transformèrent message en messagium. C'est là le véritable latin de cuisine (dog-Latin.)" (Brachet.)

§ 25. French Words of Celtic Origin.*

Most Celtic words became Low Latin before they became French.

* The various lists given here and elsewhere make no pretence to completeness. The number omitted is roughly pointed out by the use of etc.; etc., etc.; etc., etc., etc. Much longer ones are given by Brachet : unfortunately they very often disagree with the Dictionary to which they form part of the introduction. They seem to have been hastily compiled after the completion of the Dictionary. For the most part, when a mistake occurs, the list is wrong, the Dictionary right.

§ 26. French Words of Teutonic Origin. Most Teutonic words were brought into France during the great invasions of the fourth and fifth centuries; many were brought in by the Normans in the tenth century; a few established themselves at the time of the Romans. Almost all became Low Latin before they became French.*

* M. Ampère thinks that the sense attached to words borrowed from the German clearly shows the moral rebellion of the Gallo-Romans against the conquerors. Of land (terre), they made lande (sterile land); of buch (livre) bouquin (old book not worth much); of herr (Seigneur) hère (poor, morally helpless man). See also Du Méril, "Essai philosophique sur la Langue française." Whilst adopting these German elements, the Romance languages did not suffer in their syntax; for they almost completely overcame the influence of the German grammar.Diez, vol. i. See, however, Du Méril, pp. 343-445,