225
would be implied by a distant common origin of this kind, where are we to look for it? Evidently not in the grammatical inflexions and terminations, nor in the construction or syntax, for all these belong to the comparatively later stages of a language’s development. Nor is it likely that after a separation of many thousands of years, any considerable part of the vocabulary should be the same. All that we can reasonably expect to find is that a number of the more essential roots in Japanese and in Aryan languages should upon examination appear to be identical, and if this were shown to be the case, enough would have been proved to substantiate the hypothesis above suggested.
The method and conditions of such an inquiry deserve a few words of remark. Some of the principles which should guide it may he stated as follows:—
The oldest words and forms of words attainable should be compared.
All grammatical additions should be carefully eliminated.
No letter-changes should be considered probable which are not supported by well established analogous cases.
The great desideratum, however, in comparing Japanese with Aryan languages is the discovery of the law or laws which govern the letter-changes which take place, in short of such a law as that discovered by Grimm for the principal branches of the Aryan family. It can hardly be doubted that if any real affinity exists, there will also be some such law by which their relations are governed.
The peculiarities of the languages concerned should not be forgotten. Those of the European languages it is impossible to enumerate here, but it may not be out of place to note briefly a few characteristics of the Japanese language which have a bearing on this question.
R is never found at the beginning of a word.
L is not a Japanese sound. It is represented by r.
N is not found at the end of verbal roots.
M and b are often interchangeable.
H and f are in Japanese identical.
