Staal 1979 Origin

Oriental Ideas on the Origin of Language
Author(s): Frits Staal

Source: Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 99, No. 1 (Jan. - Mar., 1979), pp. 1-
14
Published by: American Oriental Society
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/598944
Accessed: 27-05-2020 18:12 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
American Oriental Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Journal of the American Oriental Society
This content downloaded from 183.87.152.62 on Wed, 27 May 2020 18:12:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
ORIENTAL IDEAS ON THE ORIGIN OF LANGUAGE*
FRITS STAAL
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY
The legend of Genesis 2.19-20, which expresses a view about the development from names to
nouns, and other ideas attributed to, read into and superimposed upon it, have influenced the course
of Western speculation on language for several millennia. Thus arose one of the most misleading
notions of mankind: the idea that language originates from naming. This idea occured not only in the
Ancient Near East, but also in Greece and China. It implied that grammar is not part of language,
but imposed upon it from the outside.
The Chinese had also more sophisticated ideas, e.g., that language consists of sentences and
propositions in addition to names. Language, morever, is not only for naming but also for issuing
orders. To the Indians, language is primarily for doing, not for naming. Accordingly, there is a close
connexion with ritual, which suggests that the origin of language is in fact partly ritual.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: The only procedural question now remaining is

where to start, and in which direction to move. Though
In 1975, the New York Academy of SciencesI shall move about freely, I have decided to start in an
organized a conference of more Wagnerian propor- area with which many of us are familiar, and end on
tions than our own. It was devoted to the origins those and distant tracks where I am more at home myself.
evolution of language and speech. Contributions were To connect these two with other regions of interest, I
made by linguists, philosophers, psychologists, biolo- shall go due west. After the Ancient Near East, which
gists, anthropologists, neurologists and others. The continues to determine contemporary ideas on the
first paper, by Hans Aarsleff, surveyed theories on subject,
the I shall touch on Egypt, pass through the Pillars
origin of language since the Renaissance. In the of Hercules and the Panama Canal, beyond the
discussion, Gordon Hewes, known for his work on the confines of our Society, enter East Asia and come to a
gestural theory of language origin, asked Aarsleff stop in South Asia. I shall pay scant attention to
whether he was right in thinking that serious specula- chronology and history. While these limitations are
tion on this topic was uniquely Western, since, as far as mostly arbitrary, it is significant that it will be generally
he knew, "intellectual concern with the problem of the impossible to make a sharp distinction between myths,
origin of language beyond legend or myth is not legends, serious speculation and intellectual concern.
outstanding in any other major civilization, any other In the second chapter of Genesis, God is concerned
major literature such as Chinese, or even Indic philos- that man should not be alone. "So God Yahweh
ophy." Aarsleff answered: "Yes, but I feel I know formed out of the soil various wild beasts and birds of
hardly anything about the subject." the sky and brought them to the man to see what he
As you will have learned, knowlege is ephemeral, but called them; whatever the man would call a living
prejudices are tenacious. It is not that I know much creature, that was to be its name. The man gave names
more about the subject than these two gentlemen; but I to all cattle, all birds of the sky, and all wild beasts."'
am well disposed to it. If one hopes to progress from This passage is significant both for its connections with
prejudice to knowledge, with all due deference to other biblical ideas, and for its influence on Western
Archimedes, two roads are open: one slow, the other thought. I shall review five points: (1) naming as a
fast. The slow one is to acquire knowledge by assiduous creative act; (2) naming as an expression of ownership;
study. This road is reserved for students. The fast one (3) the distinction between men and animals; (4) the
is to hold forth on the subject in the company of those origin of language; and (5) the emphasis on naming.
who know. This road is reserved for presidents of (1) Many of the earlier interpreters of this passage
learned societies. In embarking upon this second road, have indulged in the allegedly widespread magical
I trust you will afterwards grant me the knowledge I belief according to which names are intimately
shall appear to have withheld in the course of this involved with the essence ofthings. Even N. M. Sarna,
address.
among moderns, invokes this tendency in order to
2 Journal of the American Oriental Society 99.1 (1979)
explain that giving a name is connected with creativity.2 In spite of what the Midrash story suggests, it is
According to him, naming initiates creation, but since important to observe that the Genesis legend pertains
God in Genesis created before naming, he resorts to to proper names and not to common nouns. The
the hypothesis that "in the scriptural demythologizing difference is this. If dogs were already known by the
process the order has been reversed." To illustrate this common noun "dog," God would merely have tested
further, Sarna refers to the Egyptian God Atum, who man's knowledge of a part of his vocabulary. But if
brought other Gods into being by naming the parts of God really left it to man to determine the names at least
his body. Similarly, new eras were marked by kings or of animals, man called a certain beast for the first time
other prominent individuals changing names. There by a proper name-say, "Dobermannpinscher." In
are instances in the Old Testament, for example, due course this developed into a family or generic
Abram's name being changed into Abraham.3 I need name, so that all such beasts came to be called
hardly remind you of the fact that such phenomena are "Dobermannpinscher." Finally the name "Dobermann-
not confined to the Ancient Near East. We proclaim pinscher" became a common noun, dobermann-
democracies all over the world, and, even on the pinscher. Underlying Genesis 2 is a theory that some
academic front, at least in California, colleges turn into such development took place. This is not explicit
universities overnight. Though there is scope for because there is no clear distinction between names
psychology here, we may safely accept the view of Von and nouns, which in turn is due to the simple fact that in
Rad and others that the explanation of this passage biblical Hebrew, there is only one word, shem, to refer
from Genesis does not require the allegedly primitive to both.
view of the connection between a name and its bearer.4 (3) Our Genesis passage does not refer to Dober-
(2) Our passage belongs to the so-called Yahwist mannpinschers, but it certainly makes much of the
strand of Genesis. In the Priestly source of Genesis 1 distinction between men and animals. No wonder that
(26-28) we have been told that the animals are subject in due course even humans felt the need for animal
to man. It is not surprising, then, to find this dominion liberation. This observation takes us from interpreta-
also emphasized in the Yahwist passage. Whether such tion of the text to a broader consideration of its
repetitions exhibit the redundancy which is charac- significance and later influence. We may note in
teristic of all communication5 is not relevant here: we passing that such a transition also provides an illus-
find the naming of someone or something as an tration of the emptiness of names: for a concern which
expression of ownership throughout the Old Testa- is broader than textual interpretation is not made any
ment.6 Man himself receives his name from God a little better or clearer by giving it a name, such as
later, in Genesis 5:2. It seems to me that Cassuto (who "hermeneutics," for example.
provides the above references) has also given the most In many civilizations, men and animals are placed
balanced interpretation: "The Lord of the universe on a more equal footing than in Genesis. Examples
named the parts of the universe and its time-divisions,7 abound. In the ancient Egyptian hymn to Amon-Re of
and He left it to man to determine the names of those the 18th dynasty (1550-1350 B.c.), the God is simply
creatures over which He had given him dominion."8 said to have "made mankind and created the beasts."10
What is left of this freedom? We still exercise it In India, Daksa, a son of Brahma, created sages, gods,
when we name our cats and dogs. In the more didacticheavenly musicians, men, serpents, demons, tree
than exegetical Jewish literature of the Midrash we spirits, ghosts, devils, birds, domestic cattle and wild
come across another familiar element. Adam is por- beasts.11 We find Gods with animal features and
trayed as more intelligent than the angels, but at the animal Gods in Egypt, India, and elsewhere. Nor is
same time treated as a small child in tones reminiscent this tendency confined to the realm of ideas. I need
of the playpen. First God paraded the animals before only remind you of the buddhist king Asoka, who
the angels, and asked them their name. They did notestablished animal hospitals in the third century B.C.
know. Then he paraded them before Adam and askedCloser to our subject we find world-wide references to
him: "What is the name of this?"-"An ox."-"And animal language and, in fairy tales, stories of men who
of this?"-"A camel."-"And of this?"-"An ass." converse with animals. In the Koran, for example,
-After the horse, God asks: "And what is Sulaiman, your unlike his biblical prototype Solomon, but
name?" and finally: "And what is My name?"9- like the Midrash, knows the language of birds (27:16),
Noteworthy in this Midrash version is the implicit a theme further developed by the mystic Farrd al-Din
analogy between the origin of language and the attempt 'Attar (12th century) in an allegorical work entitled
to teach language to children. Manfiq at-tair, "The Speech of the Birds."
STAAL: Oriental Ideas on the Origin of Language 3
A section from a Taoist work, the Lieh-tzi,(a) dating I have quoted these views at some length not because
from about 300 A.D. according to A. C. Graham, I wish to moralize, but because they are relevant to our
deserves to be quoted in full: topic. Though there have been exceptions (in Kabba-
lah, Zohar, fairy tales, etc.), the view that language is
When the Yellow Emperor made war against Yen-ti the distinguishing mark that separates men from ani-
in the wilds of Fan-ch'uan, he commanded bears, mals is characteristic of the Western heritage. It is an
wolves, leopards and tigers as his vanguard, and indispensable part of the philosophy of such men as
eagles, pheasants, falcons and kites as his standard- Herder, von Humboldt and-Cassirer. It is not confined
bearers. This is an example of mastering the beasts to philosophy. Max Miiller, the Sanskritist, "was
and birds by force. When Yao made K'uei his director never tired, to the end of his days, of arguing that this
of music, he beat the stone chimes and all the beasts possession of language was the death-blow to Dar-
joined in the dance; he performed the nine parts of the winism."13 Recognizing this does not imply that we
Hsiao-shao music, and the phoenix came to dance to should lean over backwards and accept all animal
its rhythm. This is an example of attracting the beasts systems of communication as language. But since the
and birds by music. In what way, then, are the minds of gap Westerners feel is largely cultural, it would seem
beasts and birds different from man's? Since they advisable that we continue to look for animal fore-
differ from man in shape and voice, we do not know the runners of features of language, even if what has so far
Way to make contact with them, but the sage knows been offered does not look promising.
everything and understands everything, and that is (4) The Genesis passage says very little about the
why he succeeds in drawing them to him and making origin of language. It does not claim that man created
them his servants. language, or that God created language. It suggests, as
There are ways in which the intelligence of beasts we have seen, that names developed into nouns, and
and birds is by nature similar to man's. They wish astherefore presupposes language. This is confirmed by
much as we do to preserve their lives, and do not have other passages. God did not only give names before
to borrow from man's wisdom to do so. Buck and doe man did; he also frequently addressed man. You
cannot address without language. Hence the prevailing
mate together, mother and child keep close together;
Western view, that language is of divine origin- a view
they shun the plains and choose inaccessible places,
not
avoid cold and seek out warmth; they live in herds and challenged seriously until Herder's Abhandlung
iiber den Ursprung der Sprache of 1772. According to
travel in formations with the young ones on the inside
Herder, Genesis 2 indicates that man created language
and the fully grown on the outside; they lead each
by deriving names from the various sounds which
other to water and call to each other when they find
food. In the most ancient times men and animals lived animals produce.
together and walked side by side. In the time of the The fact that Genesis pictures God as addressing
Five Emperors and the Three Kings, the animals were man has occasioned a host of interpretations and
frightened away and scattered for the first time. In our comments. Leaving aside the discussion on whether
the medium used was Hebrew or another language, we
own degenerate times, they crouch in hiding and flee to
their lairs to avoid harm. find Jacob Grimm in 1851 gently pointing out that if
Even now, in the country of Chieh in the East, thereGod spoke language, we must assume that he had
are many people who understand the speech of domes- teeth, but since teeth were not created for speech but
tic animals; this is a discovery possible even to our for eating, we must assume that he also ate, and this
limited knowledge. The divine sages of the mostleads to so many other undesirable assumptions that
we had better abandon the idea altogether.14 Even
ancient times knew the habits of all the myriad things,
Ludwig Wittgenstein made a note on the subject.
and interpreted the cries of all the different species;
they called them together for meetings and gave According to him, if someone says that you can't hear
them instructions, as though they were human beings.God address someone else, since you can hear him only
So the fact that the sages would meet the spirits and if you are being addressed yourself, such a person is
goblins first, next summon the human beings of the making a grammatical remark.15 He means, presumably,
eight quarters, and finally assemble the birds and that the expression "God addresses x," where x is a
beasts and insects, implies that there are no great variable, admits only a single constant as a substitute
differences in mind and intelligence between living for x. In other words, the verb "address" with God as
species. The divine sages knew that this was the case,
subject is structurally similar to such verbs as "single
and therefore in teaching they left out none of them.12 out."
(5) We now come to the least obvious but most of facts combined with blind resistence to any
fundamental feature of the Genesis passage: the discussion which goes in depth. Scholars,
emphasis on naming. I believe that we have here one of proud of their scientific method, produce the
the main roots of one of the most misleading notions of most amazing and unsound etymologies."18
mankind: the idea that language is naming. It is only This amazing juxtaposition shows how Jas-
one of its possible roots. In Greek, too, there is only pers' own profundity has prevented him from
one word, 6voua, for "name" and "noun." Plato recognizing the distinction between etymology
confounded language and naming, albeit in a some- and linguistics, or words and language.
what sophisticated fashion, without having read In the Western and Islamic traditions, logicians
Genesis; so did the Chinese philosopher Hsiin Tzu, as have since Aristotle understood that language has a
we shall see. These parallels reveal that we are not structure. The medieval logicians, for example, distin-
dealing with mere prejudice, but that naming is indeed guished from ordinary terms, such as nouns and verbs,
a prominent feature of language. syncategoremata, such as "not," "is," "every," "if."
Yet the theory that language consists only of names Though the respective domains do not exactly coincide,
is as adequate as the theory that nature consists only of the Chinese grammarians recognized some of these
pebbles. The easiest way to see this is by using the functional words as "empty" words, and the Indian
inventory method. In language, there are not only grammarians as in-cidentals or "things-falling-in-
names, but also other nouns; not only nouns, but also between" (nipata). Western linguists recognized
verbs and other parts of speech; not only words, but them, and yet often remained suspicious of logic. Even
also sentences, not to mention phonemes, morphemes, de Saussure did not recognize that they had been
paragraphs and the rest. All these hang together in discovered by logicians because he felt that logic was
manifold and mysterious ways, as you well know. In normative and had nothing to contribute to the scien-
brief, language has a structure, which is expressed by tific study of language.19 Bloomfield, on the other
its grammar. Genesis 2, without saying so, has con- hand, recognized that the Greek logicians had dis-
tributed to the widespread though mostly implicit view, covered the parts of speech and syntactic construction,
that grammar, instead of exhibiting its structure, is only "they defined these not in terms of recognizable
imposed upon language from the outside. This is the linguistic forms, but in abstract terms which were to tell
view of the man in the street, who thinks that language the meaning of the linguistic class."20 As you know,
consists of words so that philology and linguistics both meaning is back in linguistics.
reduce to etymology. But this view is also widespread The correct insights of logic have remained curiously
in scholarly and academic circles. Before discussing it isolated. In philosophy, the clearest formulation of the
let me give three examples from the 18th, 19th and idea that language is a set of names is due to Augustine,
20th centuries: in the 4th century A.D. Its clearest repudiation is due to
Wittgenstein, sixteen centuries later. Augustine con-
(a) Herder, in his essay, states it with classical
succinctness: "Since every grammar is onlycluded
a from Genesis 2 that all words are names of
philosophy of language and a method ofobjects,
its and sentences combinations of such names.
use, it follows that the more original theHere we witness how myth has solidified and turned
language, the less grammar there must be into
in serious speculation. Augustine did not merely
subscribe to this view in theory, but accepted it in
it, and the oldest (language) is simply the
vocabulary of nature."'6 practice. Taking a line from Virgil, starting with the
(b) Theodore Benfey, in the Introduction to word
his si, "if," he enumerated the objects of which its
Vedic grammar of 1874, claimed that the constituent words were allegedly names. He inter-
Indians have left us on the one hand (in the
preted si as a name for "doubt." Augustine also
Vedas) the most beautiful language withoutdeclined
a to learn Hebrew, since all knowledge of
Hebrew could be obtained from onomastic lists of
grammar based upon it, and on the other hand
Hebrew names, such as were widely available at the
(in Panini) the most beautiful grammar with-
out the language upon which it is based.17time.21 I have found that such study is still recom-
(c) Karl Jaspers, the existentialist philosopher,
mended by travel agents.
in the chapter on language from his giganticWittgenstein starts his Philosophical Investigations
Von der Wahrheit (1947), after criticizing
of 1945 with a quotation from Augustine. Discussing
several linguists, says: "In Jespersen we find
this, he says it is either a primitive idea of how language
instructive common sense and a great variety
functions, or the idea of a language more primitive than
ours. He then constructs a language for which the libbisu, "his wish fulfillment."25
description of Augustine holds: In the Sumerian parallel it was Enki, God of
Wisdom, who confounded man's speech. The reason is
The language is meant to serve for communication
not stated but it may well have been Enki's jealousy of
between a builder A and an assistant B. A is building
Enlil, a popular rival. According to Kramer, the
with building-stones: there are blocks, pillars, slabs and
confounding of languages was in either case due to
beams. B has to pass the stones, and that in the order in
jealousy and rivalry: in the Sumerian between God and
which A needs them. For this purpose they use a
God, in the Hebrew between God and man.26
language consisting of the words "block," "pillar,"
Speiser translated the first line of the Babel legend
"slab," "beam." A calls them out;-B brings the stone
as: "The whole world had the same language and the
he has learnt to bring at such-and-such a call.22
same words,"27 noting that "same" is a translation of
After showing that there are numerous problems the Hebrew adjective "one" in the plural. One need not
inherent in such a conception of language, Wittgen- be a mathematician to be puzzled by a plural one.
stein devotes much of the rest of his book to an attempt According to Aaron Shaffer, the expression ahadim,
to show how language works. I find this attempt which sometimes denotes a set or pair, is here used to
haphazard, but the experts continue to discuss its refer to Sumerian and Akkadian, which were regarded
merits. as expressions of the same language.28 This becomes
I have taken this time to show how a simple idea intelligible against a long bilingual tradition, during
expressed by an Oriental text, and other ideas attributed which tablets were written with Sumerian texts on the
to, read into and superimposed upon it, have left and the corresponding Akkadian on the right. The
influenced the course of Western speculation on two languages were regarded as languages of compati-
language for several millennia. Genesis neither offered bility, mirroring each other. It is of course possible not
a theory of language, nor a theory of the origin of to realize that different words and even texts represent
language. It contained, implicitly, an idea about the different languages-it happens with bilingual children.
development from names to nouns. Complications According to Shaffer, the subsequent confounding
does not refer to a differentiation of languages but
started when it was believed that the text dealt with
expresses increasing discordance and alienation.
more than it dealt with, and legend became theory.
Thus arose the idea that language is a set of names, andI am not competent to comment on the merits of this
that it originated from naming. We are still sorting theory
out and I don't know whether it has been tested
the resulting confusions, and I am sure we have not against the data from Old-Babylonian grammar. From
about 1600 B.c., grammatical texts analyzed Sumerian
seen the end of them. Let us try to learn at least one
thing. It is unlikely that those theories on the origintexts
of in terms of Akkadian.29 Considering the sophisti-
language will be adequate, which start with names, catedor level of these texts, it seems conceivable, but
even words, and try to add structure and grammar only barely, that the two languages were not distin-
afterwards. guished as languages. These old grammatical works
There is one more passage in Genesis to which I wish distinguished at any rate clearly between pronouns,
to draw your attention, this time briefly: the legend of adverbs and verbs. It seems a great pity that such
the Tower of Babel.23 As you know this story, which is insights were not incorporated in the mainstream of the
full of Mesopotamian material, relates how God Western tradition, which labored instead under the
confounded man's language after man had built a tower illusion that language consists of names.
from bricks with its top in the sky. According to The tower of Babel, like all important structures in
S. N. Kramer, the legend may have been partly in- Mesopotamia, was built from kiln-fired bricks, a rarity
spired by what must have been a common sight in in Palestine. The episode of the bricks is again
Mesopotamia, viz., the "melancholy and pathetic" developed in concrete detail in later Jewish legends.
appearance of ziggurats in a state of disrepair and They explain how confounding language could cause
collapse.24 Speiser has emphasized the literary origins real harm: "One builder would ask for the mortar, and
in Mesopotamia. The legend is certainly inspired by a the other hand him a brick; in a rage, he would throw
pun in Hebrew on balal, "mixed, confused" and the brick at his partner and kill him."30 You will
Babel, the name for Babylon which is itself of uncertainremember that Wittgenstein imagined communication
origin. The explanation bab-ill, "gate of the gods," is abetween builders when he constructed his artificial
popular etymology. In Akkadian there were other biblical language. As a boy of Jewish extraction in
wordplays, as when Babylon was spoken of as bibil Vienna he must have been familiar with the story of
Babel, and possibly with some of these later legends-- concerned with semantic features of language and
though I grant that his father was an engineer and he deserve study at least from this perspective. The same
himself built at least one house. can be said of some of the more mystical speculations
There is another reference in the Old Testament to on mantras we find in India, for example, in Tantrism.
the legend of Babel: Zephaniah 3, a prophetic escha- I have touched the Islamic middle ages but I
tology which advocates a return to the good old days of promised earlier to pay no attention to history. So let us
pure speech before the dispersion.31 The tower of go back two millennia. In ancient Egypt, the reverence
Babel legend also serves as a prefiguration of thefor names seems to have been extraordinary. A person
Pentacost in Acts 2, where the multiplicity of languages was virtually annihilated when his name was erased. It
is overcome by "tongues as if of fire" (yX3ooalt 6oeiwas worse than losing your social security number.
nrpo6), which seem to address everyone in his own Language and script were considered of divine origin.
language. One might try to make sense of this by Thoth, God of wisdom and writing, for example, also
assuming that the Holy Spirit plants meanings directly "distinguishes one speech from another."35
into the brain, which are verbalized differently by The ancient Egyptians had a very cosmopolitan
different individuals in line with their own language.attitude with regard to languages, which developed
Fortunately, I need not pursue this further since itespecially during the New Kingdom (16th-llth cen-
involves Western languages and is therefore beyond tury B.C.). Long used to distinguish different languages,
the confines of our Society. and also dialectical differentiation within their own
The same excuse does not apply to another passage language,36 they came to regard all peoples as creatures
in the New Testament which is related to the origin ofof the Sun God, who made them diverse in skin color,
language: the X6yog speculation at the beginning ofcharacter and speech.37 As Sauneron (1960) has
John. This is a subject so large that I could not even shown, this development is conected with the fact that
begin to approach it. However, let me remind those ofthe Egyptian terms ns and whm mean "tongue" as well
you who do not know it already, that X6yog specula- as "language." This same ambiguity is found in several
tions have flourished in Islam, among philosophers, Semitic and Indo-European languages. The Egyptians
theologians and mystics. Though Greek and Christian,not only considered the tongue the organ of speech,
and perhaps Judaic origins are clear, many of these they also attributed every modification of speech to a
speculations, e.g., in al-Hallaj, al-Ghazzali, and Ibnphysical modification of the tongue. To learn another
'ArabI, are quite different from anything that developed language is therefore to twist one's tongue differently.
in the West. These developments could not have takenSince they were convinced of the basic equality of all
place without Koranic sources. In the Koran, Christ israces, they were also convinced of the basic equality of
referred to as the word (kalima) and spirit (riuh) ofall languages. All have access to the next world, which
God,32 terms which correspond to X6yo; and nveCpla, is shown by the fact that an interpreter resided in
respectively.33 In due course, X6yog speculations wereheaven.38 This attitude is not only very different from
applied to Muhammed and amr, the creative commandthe Old Testament, in which Driver found "dread and
of God which is of the form "Be!" (kun). This led to aversion for men speaking unintelligible languages;"39
grammatical metaphysics not of nouns but of verbs it still contrasts favorably with the attitude of the
(afal), based upon the three consonants which in majority of mankind in 1978.
general determine a verbal root in Arabic-as in other I must also make mention of the well-known story
Semitic languages. Since meanings were mystically of Herodotus40 according to which the Egyptian king
attributed to these letters, the meaning of a root wasPsammetichus, desiring to find out which was the
considered a function of the meanings of the letters,earliest language, isolated two children from the
irrespective of their permutations. In Judaism, theresounds of language and gave instruction to wait for
were similar developments in the Kabbalah. In Islam, their first words. The result established that the
this was called "superior semantics" (ishtiqaq akbar).natural language was Phrygian. Such experiments
Ultimately, letters were regarded as the elementary have occasionally been repeated or thought of in
forms of human breath, and our knowledge of them was later times.
inculcated upon us when God inspired Adam with We shall speed westward in the direction of China
breath.34
and India, two civilizations which, like ancient Egypt,
Though many of the X6yo; and related speculations, regarded themselves as the center of the world. The
whether Judaic, Christian or Muslim, are very mystical Chinese were obsessed by writing, just as the Indians
and some are decidely eccentric, they are sometimes were obsessed by language. The Indians could not be
obsessed by writing for they did not know it during the this background the various characterizations of
most formative period of their culture; when they Indian languages given by Chinese pilgrims become
finally imported it, they considered it low and impure. intelligible.42
Neither culture was very cosmopolitan, but I think it is Serious obstacles had to be faced when real transla-
fair to say that the Indians outdid the Chinese in self- tion was attempted. Mystic abracadabra afforded no
centredness. Despite the numerous languages spoken assistance. According to van Gulik, the bulk of the
within their subcontinent, not to mention others, the enormous Buddhist Canon could only be translated
Indians paid serious attention only to Sanskrit. The because Indian and especially Central Asian monks
Chinese, at least some of them, and at least in later did part of the job. Also, there was close teamwork.
times, became interested in Sanskrit after Chinese Several members of the team first cooperated to
Buddhist pilgrims had begun to visit India. transliterate the Sanskrit into Chinese characters,
These later efforts of the Chinese to understand utilizing their phonetic value. Then an official called a
Sanskrit throw much light on the way they conceived Recorder
of replaced each word by a Chinese equivalent.
language. Their predominant desire was to findAtout this point a Style Corrector came in, who made the
how written characters should be pronounced. In an conform to Chinese. A thirteenth century text,
result
empire with a highly developed system of writing, translated
and by van Gulik, comments on this as follows:
numerous mutually unintelligible dialects, the "In firstSanskrit generally that which should come first is
placed last; thus they say, 'Buddha praying' instead of
challenge is to master the system of writing by relating
it to one's own speech; the next, when meeting 'praying
with to Buddha,' and 'bell ringing' instead of
another dialect, is to learn its meaning by relating'ringing
its the bell."'43 Several other specialists com-
pronunciation to the script. Such practice does pleted
not the task: an Assistant Translator, a Deleter and
develop one's concept of linguistic structure, but a Style Polisher.
capacities of much greater value: the eye and the ear. The most uncontroversial part of these translations
Applying these ideas to the study of Indian scripts,isthe
the part played by the Recorder. He could be as good
task seemed ludicrously simple: the characters are as his dictionary. A computer fed with a vocabulary
few,
and they correspond with pronunciation in a simple would do no worse. But since Sanskrit is inflected and
and straightforward manner. Having mastered these Chinese is not, we must assume that the Recorder
features of language, the Chinese assumed that they primarily arrived at strings of Chinese characters
knew the Indian language, for what else could there which
be express what the Chinese grammarians call
to know? They were baffled only when they found"full" that words, i.e., words which correspond to our
they did not really understand it. But a curious nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs. The result must
circumstance supported their original assumption. have been gibberish. I take it that the Style Corrector
Buddhism introduced into China numerous dharant, knew vaguely what the text was about. He had to
magical spells, such as om kirikiri vajrabhur bandha provide the structure, i.e., supply many of the "empty"
ham phat (a mantra, found in Japan, which accom- or functional words such as particles and the like. His
panies the gesture of the blue lotus: Lokesh Chandra job was creative and risky, and I doubt a computer
2). The Chinese were not only ready to receive such could do it, unless it also knew vaguely what the text
sacred noises because they sounded mysterious, was about. The resulting structure resembles written
resembled the magical formulas of popular Taoism, Japanese, in which many "full" words are written in
and were suitable for recitation and meditation; but Chinese characters, while "empty" words are written
they also conformed precisely to their idea of language. in the Japanese syllabary.44
For as soon as you know how to derive the pronun- Demieville in his book on the council of Lhasa45 has
ciation of a mantra from the way it is written, you drawn attention to the role Tibetan played as an inter-
know all there is to know about it. Van Gulik who mediary in these translation activities. Bilingualism
explained these circumstances in a book41 which between
he Tibetan and Chinese was common in those
wrote while he was Netherlands Ambassador in India regions of China which were under Tibetan occupation
also showed that the Chinese looked upon the syllables during the eighth century. Conversation manuals were
of Indian scripts as if they were Chinese idiographic available and Tibetan ambassadors travelling to China
characters-an error which was again fortified by the had interpreters in their retinue.46
fact that, in later Indian religion, all syllables were The Chinese attitude with regard to language and
artifically assigned a mystical meaning, just as we script explains their attitude with regard to origins:
earlier met with in Islam and in the Kabbalah. Against there are several Chinese legends about the origins of
writing, but apparently none about the origins of name. The distinction, says Graham, "grammatically
language. With regard to script I shall keep a respectful less marked in Chinese than in Indo-European lan-
distance: the East Asia section of our conference has guages, seems to have attracted attention only after it
just devoted the afternoon to the earliest Chinese was noticed that 'knowing is different from having a
script. pictorial idea."'
Foremost among Chinese scholars who touched One later philosopher developed these ideas in
upon the origin of language is the Confucian philoso- greater detail, arrived at a doctrine not dissimilar to
pher Hsiin Tzu(b) (about 298-238 B.C.). Hsiin Tzu that of Herder, and we:it beyond that: Tung Chung-
wrote a chapter on the "Rectification of Names" shu(e) of the former Hari dynasty (179?-104? B.C.). He
(cheng ming),(c) developing a theme that had been refers not only to "names" (ming2(f)) but alsc to
introduced by Confucius saying: "Let the ruler be "appellations" (hao4(g)), and engages in intricate
ruler, the subject subject; let the father be father, and wordplays on these terms and on ming2(h) ("to utter
the son son."47 Hsiin Tzu believed that language, like sounds"), ming4{i) ("orders"), hsiaoO) ("to emit ejacu-
the other artifacts of civilization, was the creation of lations") and hsiao4(k) ("to mimic"). I am in no
the sage-kings of old. However, he did not mean the position to comment on this analysis, which I shall read
earliest mythical sage-kings, such as Yao and Shun, in Derk Bodde's translation from Fung Yu-lan's
but the later kings of the Chou dynasty. Are we to infer History of Chinese Philosophy:
that those earliest sages did not speak? No, for Hsiin
Tzu has specific names in mind, at least at the outset of The ancient sages emitted ejaculations which mimicked
his essay when he says: (the sounds of) Heaven and Earth, and which were
called appellations. When issuing orders, they uttered
In the case of legal terms, they followed the practices
sounds which were called names. Thus names may be
of the Yin dynasty; in the case of terms pertaining to
described as sounds uttered to give orders, while appel-
ranks and titles, they followed Chou practice; and for
lations may be described as ejaculations uttured in
the names of ceremonies and ceremonial objects, they
mimicry. Ejaculations emitted in mimicry of Heaven
followed ritual practice. For the common names
and Earth constitute appellations; sounds uttered to
applied to all the various things of creation, they
followed the established customs of China .. .48 give orders constitute names. Names and appellations
are variously pronounced, but have the same origin in
In this opening passage, Hsin Tzu does not refer to that all consist of sounds and ejaculations uttered to
the origin of language. In the sequel, his chief purpose make known the meaning of Heaven. Heaven speaks
seems to be to demonstrate that the state must maintain not yet it enables men to make evident its meaning. It
fixed meanings for words in order to prevent social and acts not, yet it enables men to conduct themselves in
political confusion-somewhat like the Academie accordance with the mean. Names, therefore, constitute
francaise. Yet there is an ambivalence throughout his Heaven's meaning as it has been discovered by the
essay between specific names and general terms or sages, and as such they should be deeply looked into.50
words. He maintains, for example, that names have no
intrinsic appropriateness but are purely conventional Here we find something more than names: issuing
-an idea which could be made to apply to all words.orders. Though imperatives do not suffice to explain
Also, he refers to larger units constructed from names,the origin of language, they are better candidates than
and here it becomes clear that he either means, or oughtnames. We should recall that several nineteenth-
to mean, words in general: "Propositions are the century Western scholars regarded imperatives as the
combinations of names for different realities, put oldest forms of language because of their formal
together so as to express a single meaning." I have put simplicity (e.g., Latin i, "go!"). In Tun Chung-shu's
this translation together by combining Duyvendak, passage we may also note the advantage of looking at
Bodde, Mei, Dubs, and Watson.49 The term tz '2(d) is heaven without anthropomorphism: there is no attempt
translated as "proposition" by the first three, "speech" to attribute speech or teeth to it, yet it can be endowed
by the fourth and "phrase" by the fifth. In his with meaning. It may also be noted that all the Chinese
forthcoming book Later Mohist Logic, A. C. Graham quotes I have so far given come from Confucian
has shown that the most important innovation of the sources. What about the Taoists and Buddhists? The
Mohist work Names and Objects and of Hsin Tzu is early Taoists were not interested in language, and
precisely the use of tz 'z in the meaning "sentence/pro- though such an attitude is commendable in general, it
position," for the first time distinguished from the does not commend itself to students of language.
Chuang Tzu said: "A dog is not considered superior dash your hopes. But I have to begin with a small
disappointment. Sanskrit does not distinguish be-
because it is good at barking; a man is not considered
worthy merely because he is good at speaking."51 tween names and nouns-at least outside grammar.
Elsewhere he makes a direct recommendation: "There- Both are called naman, which is directly related to
Greek 6voga and Latin nomen. The Indians therefore
fore I say, we must have no-words! With words that are
did confuse names and nouns. However, it did not
no-words, you may speak all your life long and you will
matter much. In India, language is not something with
never have said anything. Or you may go through your
whole life without speaking them, in which case youwhich you name something. It is in general something
will never have stopped speaking."52 with which you do something. Therefore, performa-
Such later Taoists as Kuo Hsiang,(O) who died in 312 tives, speech acts and pragmatics all developed in
A.D., commented on the practice of "distinguishing India, and verbs are at least as important as nouns.
names and analyzing principles" as follows: Though nouns are occasionally confused with names,
both were regularly distinguished from other kinds of
These bear no relation to the functioning of the state;words and parts of speech. At an early date (in the
indeed, they may truly be called useless talk. But sinceNirukta and Pratisakhya literature, 6th century B.c.?)
young aristocrats must have some amusement when the Indians distinguished nouns and verbs (nama-
they are tired with the canonical writing, if they cankhyata) from each other and also from preverbs (upa-
distinguish names and analyze principles as an expres-sarga) and particles (nipata). I don't think this was due
sion of their spirit and intellectual discipline, and if thisto the alleged transparency of the Sanskrit language-
serves to prevent dissipation in future generations, is justit as Babylonian astronomy was not due to the alleged
not better than gaming?53 brilliance of the Babylonian sky.55 Such an assumption
is open to the objections voiced by Brough against a
In the next great wave of Taoist revelation, the Ling- similar assumption entertained with regard to the
pao scriptures, composed in the 390s, there is evidence grammar of Panini:
of Indian influence. This must have come together with
It is customary to add . . . the deprecatory remark that
the dharant sutras which were beginning to flood
Panini was, of course, aided in his analysis by the
Chinese religious practice. These scriptures, which
extraordinary clarity of the structure of the Sanskrit
provide the basis for all subsequent Taoist liturgy,
language; but we are apt to overlook the possibility
proposed a theory of their own origin in the primordial
that this structure might not have seemed so clear and
"Brahma-sound" (fan-yin(m)), from which issue
obvious to us if Panini had not analyzed it for us.56
cosmic and creative "Brahma-breaths" (fan-ch'i(n)),
which in turn form the letters of the eternal Ling-pao More important than this distinction between parts
scriptures. My colleague Michel Strickmann, who has of speech, and more characteristic of the Indian
provided this information, feels that these texts are approach to language, is a feature that is implicit in
admirably poised between occult mantric practice much Indian speculation and accordingly neglected in
and the secular science of phonetics that developed in Western studies: the Indian theorists tend to look at
fifth-century China. For more information you have to larger units of language than words. This has escaped
turn to his article which is about to appear.54 notice because of the analysis of words into roots,
As for Buddhism, let me merely note that the stems and suffixes which is typical of the Sanskrit
Confucian doctrine that names are conventional grammarians and which gave Indo-European philology
helped to pave its way, and that it could not have made
its primary impulse. So let us look at this matter a little
any significant progress in China had it notmore itself
carefully. At the same time let me foreclose the
considered language conventional and therefore dis- objection that I pay more attention to gram-
possible
pensable. This belief reflects its early history, for mar the
in India than I have done elsewhere. This may
Buddha spoke not in Sanskrit, but in the local ver-
appear to be the case. But the truth of the matter ;s that
nacular of Magadha. In India, once you dispense with grammar, the "Veda of the Vedas," pene-
in India,
Sanskrit, you have abandoned all fixedness of language.trated into all domains of culture, so that the state-
At this point I hope you have enough energy ments left to of a physician, a statesman or an astronomer all
follow me across the Himalayas and into India. Here
sound like grammar. I shall hardly refer to grammar in
you will expect me to demonstrate that confusions we
the technical sense (vyakarana).
have found elsewhere did not arise, and correct The earliest analysis of language we find in India
solutions were finally obtained. Of course, I shall notis the analysis of the Vedic samhita into its constituent
words (padapatha). This may have taken place be- language, which culminated in the grammar of Panini.
tween the 10th and the 7th century B.c. Thepadapdtha The result was a very close connection between
is constructed by detaching the words of Vedic utter- grammar and the science of ritual.62
ances from each other, dissolving the sandhi combina- Like language, ritual is recursive: it makes infinite
tions between them, and breaking the influence of the use of finite means. These may turn out to be the most
word accent in as far as it goes beyond word important discoveries which the Indians made in this
boundaries.57 In general, we tend in this process to realm. They discovered the recursiveness of language
emphasize the result, viz., the word-for-word analysis. some two millennia before von Humboldt and Chom-
But what is equally significant is the starting point, viz.,sky; and they were the only ones who discovered the
the continuous recitation of Vedic utterances (called recursiveness of ritual, at about the same time. The
samhita). Since in India, the analysis of sentences into construction of rituals of indefinitely increasing com-
words preceded the construction of sentences out of plexity is exemplified by the so-called sattra rituals.63
words, sentences were, clearly, primary. These are rituals-most of them never performed and
I can think of at least two reasons for this particular purely theoretical-which are indefinitely extended by
development. The first is that Sanskrit became a modifying and embedding existing rituals and rites.
subject of serious speculation long before it was written There is no mention or trace of an upper limit.
down toward the end of the Vedic period (the name ofHillebrandt
a was eloquent on this:
more recent script, devanagart, though reminiscent of
Diejenigen Sattra's, welche langer als zwolf Jahre
the term hieroglyphs, may be as late as the 18th
dauern, heissen mahasattra's... und hier versteigt
century58). It seems reasonable to assume that illit-
sich Mythus und Phantasie der Yajiiika's zu den
erate speakers of a language do not perceive the flow of
sechsunddreissigjahrigen Opfern der Saktya's, den
speech as consisting of words, but rather of larger
hundertjahrigen der Sadhya's, den tausendjahrigen
units, such as phrases. The second reason is that the
der Visvasrj.64
Vedic corpus, which was handed down orally, was
thought of as consisting of mantras and similar units The at grammarian Patafijali, when discussing the infinity
least as long as a verse line or sentence. And the main of language which grammar must describe by finite
means, refers to these sattra rituals:
reason that a mantra is a single unit is its ritual function
and character. In Vedic ritual, one mantra corresponds
There are indeed linguistic expressions which are
to one ritual act, which itself constitutes a single unit.
never used . . . Even though they are not used, they
This is explicitly formulated in the later ritual manuals,
have of necessity to be laid down by rules, just like
e.g.: "the acts are accompanied by single mantras"59
protracted sattras.65
or: "difference of mantra marks difference of act."60
Though Bergaigne and our Secretary-Treasurer, I believe that the Indian material suggests a much
Stanley Insler, would not mind, you might object that deeper connection between ritual and language, and
many Vedic hymns were not originally composed for that the origin of language is in fact partly ritual. It is
ritual ends. Whether true or not, it does not affect the significant, in this connection, that animals have ritual,
point. When language, i.e., the language of the Vedas, and not language. But this would take us far beyond our
became a topic for serious speculation, it was already sources into the realm of serious speculation.66
thought of as consisting of mantras or units of language So far we have looked from language to ritual. Let us
which accompany rites. now look from ritual to language. The most important
In India, language was generally approached within feature of Vedic ritual is the recitation of mantras.
a ritual perspective. The earliest reference to the origin Even if rites are modified or abandoned, mantra
of language, which occurs in the Rgveda, indicates this. recitation is maintained. One result of ritual activity is
It portrays sages who "fashioned language with their that, through mantra recitation, a universe of language
thought, filtering it like parched grain through a sieve," is constructed. Since mantras tend to lose their mean-
and who "traced the course of language through ing, or are meaningless to begin with, this is a
ritual."61 The first linguistic analysis after the pada- meaningless, and therefore mysterious, universe. It
patha is also of ritual language. In fact, grammatical results from each of the Vedic rituals. Take for
analysis probably originated because the artificial example the construction of a large altar from bricks,
language of ritual (especially in the Samaveda) was so as we find it in the Agnicayana. This construction is
extraordinary, that it simply demanded analysis. The effected, not by the mere deposition of bricks, but by
next step was to transfer such analysis to ordinary the recitation of mantras which accompanies the
deposition of each brick. This explains such state- (akhanda-vakya-sphota).

ments as we find in the Satapatha Brahmana What, then, of the origin of language? Once more I
(9.1.2.17): "This fire altar is language, for it is piled up may have to disappoint you, at least if your tastes run
with language." empiricist. Not that the Indians did not consider the
Though the historical background is different, there problem. On the contrary, according to the tradition I
is a Judaic parallel. After the destruction of the temple, have so far considered, language has no origin: it is
the sacrifices were replaced by prayers, viz., language. eternal. This is another way of saying that the Vedas
In the Agnicayana, language can also replace ritual, are eternal, for they are the embodiment of language
but even when the rites are performed, their ritual and no other language is ever seriously considered.
essence is expressed by mantras. The altar construc- This view seems to involve a confusion between
tion is a language-generating device. It does at any rate language as an infinite system and a finite corpus
not confound language. The bricks, incidentally, are language-a distinction the Sanskrit grammarians
wish-bricks. Their name, i.taka, is not confined to maintained. But since the Vedic corpus is eternal and
bricks (as the dictionaries have it), but applies to generally regarded as infinite, the distinction is blurred.
various things: a piece of gold (hira.nyeStaka), a pot While universes come and go, as do gods, men, and
(kumbhe.taka) and all kinds of pebbles.67 The term other things, the Vedas remain. The contemporary
istaka may therefore be derived from the root i4, Indian philosopher T. R. V. Murti has rightly com-
"desire," not from yaj, "perform ritual," like isti, for pared this doctrine of the eternity of language (sabda-
example. It is Indo-European and certainly not nityatva) to the Platonic theory of forms or ideas.72
Dravidian.68 When the altar is completed, the Yaja- The Vedas, for example, according to Mimamsa,
mana or patron of the ritual recites: "Agni, may these provide direct knowledge. All other knowledge is
bricks be cows for me, full of glory, giving the milk ofderived and of the form of memory.73 The doctrine of
desire in the other world."69 the eternity of language does of course presuppose that
Throughout the history of Indian speculations onmeaning is an essential part of language. It is likely that
language we find, together with the linguistic and this doctrine led to the discovery of recursiveness just
philosophical analysis, the larger units of speech as, in the West, the idea of an infinity of natural
emphasized. In the ritual philosophy of MImamsa, the numbers led to the discovery of mathematical induc-
Vedic mantras are interpreted as injunctions which tion. In general, grammar is to India what mathematics
prompt ritual action. On analysis, this prompting is is to the West.74
attributed to the injunctive force which resides in each There are numerous Indian myths which show that
sentence in the verbal ending of the main verb.70 In the universe comes from language, or at least the
later Mimamrsa we find, by the side of the Kumarila mouth. Here is a poetic version in the new translation
Bhatta view that the meaning of a sentence is the by Merwin and Masson:
combination of the meanings of its constituent words
Krishna went out to play
(abhihitanvaya), the more interesting view of Pra-
Mother
bhakara Guru that the meaning of a sentence is a
and he ate dirt
function of the combination of its words taken to-
gether as a unit (anvitabhidhana). The latter view Is that true Krishna
implies that words convey no meaning except in the
No
context of a sentence. The followers of Prabhakara
who said it
argued for this view by drawing attention to the way
children learn language: they first learn the meaning of
Your brother Balarama
larger expressions from the context or situation, and
Not true
later arrive at the meaning of individual words by
Look at my face
distributional analysis and abstraction (note that ex-
plicit teaching is not mentioned which contrasts withOpen your mouth
the Midrash and is in accordance with Augustine and
he opened it
with the small part it actually plays in language
and she stood speechless
learning71). And finally, in the most famous meta-
inside was
physic of language, propounded by Bhartrhari in the
the universe
Vakyapadtya (5th century A.D.), the main emphasis is
again on the meaning of the undivided sentence may he protect you.75
There is a minority view in India which is pro- serious speculation. Not only philosophy-even ritual
pounded in the rival tradition of early Buddhism and can be illuminating, as we have seen. As for ritual,
the materialistic school of Carvaka. It neglects mean- there is a widespread but erroneous view, that rites re-
ing, is empiricist, behavioristic and atomistic, and enact myths. We do know something much less
holds that language is arbitrary and conventional. This general: during the European middle ages, many
doctrine, which is more plausible within the limited biblical episodes provided inspiration and material for
perspective of common sense, is also linguistically less miracle plays. What would count, you may ask, as the
adequate. I have already pointed out that this view most dramatic ritual enactment of the legend of the
enabled Buddhism to travel beyond the frontiers of the tower of Babel? From among numerous suitable
Indian subcontinent. Now you also know why this candidates I would unhesitatingly select the annual
could not have happened to Hinduism, which was held meeting of the American Oriental Society. I have
back by its Mimamsa scruples. initiated our miracle play by aiming at the sky and
Our final topic is names in India. In Mimamsa, they speaking in one language. You may now disperse,
are recognized, but subordinated to injunctions. Else- confound your speech and become unintelligible to
where, they also play a relatively subordinate role, each other.
though there are exceptions of various kinds. In Indian

philosophy, a general expression for the empirical REFERENCES
world is: the world of name and form (ndmarapa). In
the Upanisads we frequently meet with the phrase Aarsleff, H. (1976), "An Outline of Language-Ori
nama eva, "names only." The best example occurs in Theory since the Renaissance," in: Steklis (1976) 4
the seventh chapter of the Chandogya Upani$ad Bloomfield, L. (1933), Language, New York.
(sixth century B.C.?). The seer Narada approaches a Bodde, D., see: Fung (1952-53).
great sage called "Perpetual Youth" (Sanatkumara), Brough, J. (1951) "Theories of General Linguistics in
and requests instruction. Perpetual Youth asks him Sanskrit Grammarians," Transactions of the Philolo
what he knows already, and Narada answers: "Sir, I Society 27-46; also in: Staal (1972) 404-414.
Cassuto, U. (1961), From Adam to Noah, Jerusalem.
know the .Rgveda, the Yajurveda, the Samaveda, the
Chao, Y. R. (1968), Language and Symbolic System
Atharvaveda which is the fourth, the epics and legends
Cambridge.
which are the fifth, the Veda of Vedas (i.e., grammar),
Converse, H. S. (1974)), "The Agnicayana Rite: Indigenous
the ancestral rites, calculus, divination, chronology, Origin?" History of Religions 14.81-95.
logic, good manners, etymology, the science of Demieville, P. (1952), Le concile de Lhasa, Paris.
Brahman, the science of demons, archery, astronomy, De Rijk, R. (1968), "St. Augustine on Language," Studies
serpentology and fine arts."-"All you have enumer- Presented to Professor Roman Jakobson by his Students,
ated," says Perpetual Youth, "is names only." And Cambridge, Mass.
then he takes him up the metaphysic winding stairs of a De Saussure, F. (1955), Course de linguistique generale,
Paris.
cosmic hierarchy: and shows him that, beyond names,
there is language; beyond language, spirit; beyond Driver, S. R. (1904), The Book of Genesis, New York-
London.
spirit, thought; beyond thought, reason; and further
Dubs, H. H. (1966), The Works of Hsintze, New York.
beyond, reflection, science, force, food, water, fire,
Duyvendak, J. J. L. (1924), "Hsiin Tzu on the Rectification
space, memory, hope, life; and after more meanderings, of Names," T'oung Pao 23.221-254.
Perpetual Youth introduces him to the Infinite, where I Edgerton, F. (1928), "Some Linguistic Notes on the
propose to leave him, and also you. Mimamsa System," Language 4.171-177.
At the end of our Oriental tour I am not in a position Freedman, H. (1939) (transl.) Midrash rabbah, I, London.
to offer a single conclusion which throws direct light on Fung, Yu-Lan (1952-53), A History of Chinese Philosophy,
the origin of language. However, we have at least I-II, Princeton.
learned negatively that no theory which confines itself Ginzberg, L. (1954), The Legends of the Jews, I,
Philadelphia.
to naming is in a position to explain the origin of
Graham, A. C. (1973), The Book of Lieh-tzu, London.
language. We have to start with grammatical structure.
Graham, A. C. (forthcoming), Later Mohist Logic.
Beyond that I have a conclusion which is indirectly Grimm, J. (1851), Uber den Ursprung der Sprache, Berlin.
relevant: in the absense of any solid knowledge on the Herder, J. G. (1772), Abhandlung uber den Ursprung der
subject-an absence solidly confirmed by the New Sprache, Berlin.
York conference to which I referred at the beginning of Hillebrandt, A. (1897), Ritual-Literatur, Vedische Opfer und
my talk-legends and myths are as serious as so-called Zauber, Strassburg.
Staal, J. F. (1972), A Reader on the Sanskrit Grammarians,

Hymes, D., ed. (1974), Studies in the History ofLinguistics.
Traditions and Paradigms, Bloomington-London. Cambridge, Mass.-London.
Imaeda, Y. (1975), "Documents tibetains de Touen-houang
Staal, J.F. (1974), "The Origin and Development of
concernant le concile du Tibet," Journal asiatique Linguistics in India," in Hymes (1974) 63-74.
263.125-146. Staal, J.F. (1977), ".Rgveda 10.71 on the Origin of
Jacobsen, T. (1974), "Very Ancient Linguistics: Babylonian
Language," Revelation in Indian Thought, Festschrift
Grammatical Texts," in: Hymes (1974) 41-62. T. R. V. Murti, Emeryville, 3-14.
Jaspers, K. (1964), Die Sprache, Miinchen. Staal, J. F. (forthcoming, a), "The Meaninglessness of
Jha, G. (1942), Parva-MImamsa in its Sources, Benares. Ritual," Numen.
Kraak, A. (1966), Negatieve Zinnen. Een Methodologische
Staal, J. F. (forthcoming, b), "Ritual Syntax," in: Nagatomi,
en Grammatische Analyse, Hilversum. M., B. K. Matilal and J. Masson, eds., Sanskrit and
Kramer, S. N. (1968), "The 'Babel of Tongues': A Sumerian
Indian Studies. Essays in Honor of Daniel H. H. Ingalls.
Version," Journal of the American Oriental SocietyStaal, J. F. (forthcoming, c), Agni: The Vedic Ritual of the
88.108-111. Fire Altar, I-II.
Steklis, H. B., S. R. Harad and J. Lancaster, eds. (1976),
Leach, E. R. (1962), "Genesis as Myth," Discovery, May;
also in: Middleton, J., Myth and Cosmos, 1-13. Origins and Evolution of Language and Speech, Annals
of the New York Academy of Sciences, 280.
Lichtheim, M. (1976), Ancient Egyptian Literature: A Book
of Readings, Berkeley-Los Angeles-London. Strickmann, M. (1978), "The Longest Taoist Scripture,"
Lokesh Chandra (no date), An Illustrated Japanese Manu- History of Religions 17.331-354.
script on Mudras and Mantras, New Delhi. Van Gulik, R. H. (1956), Siddham. An Essay on the History
Massignon, L. (1975), Le passion de Husayn Ibn Mansur of Sanskrit Studies in China and Japan, Nagpur.
Hallaj. Nouvelle edition, III, Paris. Von Grunebaum, G. E. (1961), Medieval Islam, Chicago-
Maurer, W. H. (1976), "On the Name Devanagari," Journal London.
of the American Oriental Society 96.101-104. Von Rad, G. (1972), Genesis. A Commentary, Philadelphia.
Watson, B. (1963), Hsiin Tzu: Basic Writings, New York-
Mei, Y. P. (1951), "Hsiin Tzu on Terminology," Philosophy
East and West 1:2.51-66. London.
Merwin, W. S. and J. Moussaieff Masson (1977), Sanskrit Watson, B. (1968), The Complete Works of Chuang Tzu,
Love Poetry, New York. New York-London.
Murti, T.R.V. (1963), "Some Thoughts on the Indian Wittgenstein, L. (1958), Philosophical Investigations,
Philosophy of Language," Presidential Address, Indian Oxford.
Philosophical Congress, Chandigarh, i-xxxi. Wittgenstein, L. (1970), Zettel, Berkeley-Los Angeles.
Neugebauer, 0. (1957), The Exact Sciences in Antiquity,
Providence. GLOSSARY
O'Flaherty, W. D. (1975), Hindu Myths, Harmondsworth,

Parrett, H., ed. (1976), History of Linguistic Thought and( a) ;3 e (-) At
Contemporary Linguistics, Berlin-New York, 102-136.
Pritchard, J. B., ed. (1955), Ancient Near Eastern Texts (e) f 4tt7
Relating to the Old Testament, Princeton.
Renou, L. (1941-42), "Les connexions entre le rituel et la (i) t L
() 33h) 'O
grammaire," Journal asiatique 233.105-165; also in: (1)
Staal (1972) 434-469.
(J) ora
(1 ji
Sapir, E. (1907), "Herder's 'Ursprung der Sprache,"'
Modern Philology 109-142.
Sarna, N. M. (1970), Understanding Genesis, New York. (?' 4
Sauneron, S. (1960), "La differenciation des langues d'apres
la tradition egyptienne," Bulletin de l'Institut francais
d'archeologie orientale du Caire 60.31-41. * Presidential address delivered at the 188th annual din
Speiser, E. A. (1956), "Word Plays on the Creation Epic'sof the American Oriental Society, Toronto, April 12, 1978
Version of the Founding of Babylon," Orientalia 25.317- the preparation of this text grateful use has been mad
323.
insight and information generously provided by many fri
Speiser, E. A. (1964), Genesis. Introduction, Translation and colleagues, in particular: Derk Bodde (Philadelph
and Notes, Garden City. A. C. Graham (London), Joseph Needham (Cambrid
Staal, J. F. (1963), Euclides en Panini, Amsterdam; cf. Hellmut Wilhelm (Seattle), Cyril Birch, William M. Brin
Philosophy East and West 15 (1965) 99-116. Yuen Ren Chao, Alan D. Code, Isaac M. Kikawada, Ann
Staal, J. F. (1969), "Sanskrit Philosophy of Language," Kilmer, Lewis Lancaster, Leonard H. Lesko, Edward
Current Trends in Linguistics 5.499-531; also in: Parret, Schafer, Michel Strickmann, Raymond N. Tang, and Stew
H., ed. (1976) 102-136. Yuen (Berkeley).
1 Genesis 2:19-20; translation Speiser, 1964, 15. 40 Historiae 2.2.

2 Sama, 1970, 128. 41 Van Gulik, 1956.
3 Genesis 17:5. 42 See, e.g., van Gulik, 1956, 15; cf. Staal, 1972, 4-7.
4 Von Rad, 1972, 82. 43 Van Gulik, 1956, 29.
5 A view persuasively argued by Leach 1962. 44 Cf. Chao, 1968, 106-7.
6 E.g., Num 32:38; II Kings 23:34, 24:17. 45 Which is now known never to have taken place: Imaeda,
7 Genesis 1:5, 8, 10. 1975.
8 Cassuto, 1961, 130. 46 Demieville, 1952, 20.
9 Translation Freedman I, 1939, 135. 47 Fung, 1952, I, 302.
10 Pritchard, 1955, 365. 48 Watson, 1963, 139.
11 Vayu Purana, in O'Flaherty, 1975, 47. 49 Duyvendak, 1924, 241; Bodde in Fung, 1952, I, 308;
12 Graham, 1973, 54-55. Mei, 1961, 60; Dubs, 1925, 290 and Watson, 1963, 147.
13 Sapir, 1907, 142. 50 Fung, 1953, II, 85.
14 Grimm, 1958, 28. 51 Watson, 1968, 273.
15 Wittgenstein, 1970, 124. 52 Watson, 1968, 304.
16 Quoted in Sapir, 1907, 129. 53 Fung, 1953, II, 178.
17 William Dwight Whitney adapted this view to some 54 Strickmann, 1978.
extent, cf. Staal, 1972, 139. 55 See Neugebauer, 1957, 98.
18 Jaspers, 1964, 91. 56 Brough, 1951, in Staal, 1972, 402.
19 De Saussure, 19553, 13, in Kraak, 1966, 4. 57 Cf. Staal, 1974.
20 Bloomfield, 1933, 5, in Kraak, 1966, 4. 58 Maurer, 1976.
21 De Rijk, 1968. 59 Apastamba Srauta Sutra 24.1.38.
22 Wittgenstein, 1958, 3. 60 Sahkhayana Srauta Sutra 1.2.24.
23 Genesis 11:1-9. 61 Rgveda 10.71.2-3; for a detailed discussion of this hymn,
24 Kramer, 1968, 111, note 15. see Staal, 1977.
25 Speiser, 1956, 323. 62 See, e.g., Renou, 1941-42, in Staal, 1972, 435-469.
26 Kramer, 1968, 111. 63 "Communistic Sacrifices" in the terminology of Jha,
27 Speiser, 1964, 74. 1942, 318-20.
28 Aaron Shaffer, 1977 (lecturing at Berkeley). 64 Hillebrandt, 1897, 158.
29 See, e.g., Jacobsen, 1974. 65 Mahabhdsya, ed. Kielhor 1.8,23; 9, 15; cf. Staal, 1969,
30 Ginzberg I, 1954, 180. 501-502 = 1976, 104-105.
31 Kikawada, personal communication. 66 See Staal, forthcoming a and b.
32 Koran 4:169; cf. 3:40. 67 Baudhayana Srauta Satra 10.27, 29, 31, 34, 39.
33 Von Grunebaum, 1961, 84. 68 Cf. Converse, 1974, 85.
34 Massignon, 1975, III, 91-107. 69 Taittiriya Samhita 4.4.11.3-4; cf. Staal, forthcoming c.
35 Lichtheim, 1976, 102. 70 See, e.g., Edgerton, 1928.
36 See, e.g., Pritchard, 1955, 478. 71 For references, see Staal, 1969, 512, 523 = 1976, 116,
37 Lichtheim, 1976, 98. 127.
38 An observation by Sethe quoted in Sauneron, 1960, 31, 72 Murti, 1963, 13.
note 3. 73 See, e.g., Jha, 1942, 139-40.
39 Driver, 1904, 132, quoting Is 18:11, 33:19, Dt 28:49, 74 Staal, 1963, 1965.
Jer 5:15, Ps 114. 75 Merwin and Masson, 1977, 18-19.

Staal 1979 Origin

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Staal 1979 Origin

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Oriental Ideas on the Origin of Language

Author(s): Frits Staal

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: The only procedural question now remaining is

deposition of each brick. This explains such state- (akhanda-vakya-sphota).

though there are exceptions of various kinds. In Indian

Staal, J. F. (1972), A Reader on the Sanskrit Grammarians,

O'Flaherty, W. D. (1975), Hindu Myths, Harmondsworth,

1 Genesis 2:19-20; translation Speiser, 1964, 15. 40 Historiae 2.2.

You might also like