that, inasmuch as some acquaintance with the history of Greek and Latin Inflections as read in the light of Comparative Philology is essential to an intelligent study of the grammar of those languages, some knowledge of the elements of that science might fairly be exacted from all candidates for classical honours. I am not however concerned with a defence of the study of Comparative Philology. Its bearings upon some of the most interesting problems of ethnology, of history, and of religion are too well known to require assertion; and if a mere knowledge of the forms of two or more languages seems to carry the student but a little way towards these higher regions of the science, it must be remembered that such elementary knowledge, small at first and gradually and carefully extended, is the only sure foundation for more advanced research, without which all enquiry into higher problems may lose itself in a wilderness of conjecture. I believe that a minute study and comparison of the forms of two such languages as classical Greek and Latin, or of two or more among the languages of modern Europe, with a due comprehension of the laws of phonetic change that have operated to produce existing divergences from common forms, is the best possible preparation for an adequate grasp of any of the higher problems into which the science of language enters. It has an interest too in itself; the interest of tracing in different languages the divergence, under regular processes of phonetic change, of words and forms common to them all; the interest of detecting meaning and force in much that appears at first sight arbitrary and unmeaning; above all, the interest of watching the life of a language and its perpetual growth and change in the mouths of those who speak or have spoken it. No apology, I think, is needed for any attempt to lay in the minds of boys or young men the foundation, however limited, of such a study.

The arrangement which I have adopted is that which has been found most convenient for teaching purposes. In its main outlines it is the same as that adopted by Schleicher in his 'Compendium der Vergleichende Grammatik,' and by teachers. in the schools of Germany, if I may judge from a useful little

summary entitled 'Sprachwissenschaftliche Einleitung in das Griechische und Lateinische, für obere Gymnasialclassen,' by Professor Baur of Maulbronn. It will be observed that the names referred to below as of leading authority are (unless England has by this time established a prescriptive right to Professor Max Müller) almost exclusively German; and it is not too much to say that at present Comparative Philology cannot be thoroughly studied without at least a moderate acquaintance with the German language. But the best German philological works (to say nothing of their size and cost) are often, from the very exhaustiveness of their treatment, only confusing to beginners, who require a smaller array of facts more simply and clearly arranged. And valuable as are the translations into English of such works as Bopp's 'Comparative Grammar,' Curtius' Principles of Etymology,' or Schleicher's 'Compendium,' to the advanced student or teacher, they are both in quantity and quality above the requirements of the schoolboy or the undergraduate during the first period of his University life and to serve these is the less ambitious, but I trust not less useful, aim of the present work.

may

I am conscious of many defects in my own knowledge of the subject, especially of a very imperfect knowledge of the Sanskrit forms necessary for the illustration of corresponding forms in Greek and Latin. On this account I have not presumed to cite more Sanskrit words than appeared really necessary, doing my best to secure accuracy by reference to higher authorities, and trusting that no inaccuracies into which I have fallen can altogether obscure the light which Sanskrit everywhere throws. In matters of orthography I fear that I have not succeeded in maintaining entire consistency and uniformity. For instance, the consonantal or semivowel sound of i, which we denote in English by y, and in Latin words by j, is represented sometimes by y (as on pp. 49, 70, 71, 72, 140, etc.), sometimes by j ori (as on pp. 95, 173, 191, 194, etc.). So far as such irregularity can claim for itself any principle, it is this -to use y where the chief object is to make clear to English .ears what sound (irrespective of etymology) is intended; j or i

() where it is important to keep in sight the connection with the purely vowel sound of i. Purists in Latin orthography will perhaps object to any employment of the characters j, v for the consonantal sounds of i and u; but the practical convenience of sometimes using distinct characters for distinct sounds may be pleaded in excuse. In column V of the table on p. 401 will be found stated the probable pronunciation of the letters of the Roman alphabet; and where this differs from the English pronunciation of the same letters (as in the vowels a, e, i, u, the consonants c, g before e, i, and the semivowels j, v), the former, not the latter, pronunciation is presumed in all Latin words cited. With this caution, I hope that any confusion as to the relation between the letters in question and the sounds represented by them, into which English usage might lead us, may be avoided.

It only remains to express my thanks to the Rev. G. G. Bradley, Master of University College, for assistance and advice in the preparation of this work for the press; to Professor Max Müller (though he is not responsible for anything beyond quotations from his published works) for useful hints in regard to Sanskrit terms employed; and to the Delegates of the Clarendon Press for the care taken and courtesy shown in all arrangements for publication.

Oxford, 1876.

T. L. P.

1 I regret that a very obvious error in this Table should have been allowed to pass without correction. At the bottom of column V, the Roman letters Y, Z are said to be later introductions to represent qu, z, y,' an unmeaning statement, which is really corrected in the text on p. 44, 1. 23. It should of course read 'to represent Greek v, §.'

LIST OF AUTHORITIES REFERRED TO IN THE

PRESENT WORK.

BOPP's 'Comparative Grammar,' translated by Eastwick.
MAX MÜLLER, Lectures on the Science of Language.'
'Chips from a German Workshop.'

SCHLEICHER, 'Compendium der Vergleichende Grammatik.' 3rd edition, 1871. (One volume of a translation into English has appeared.) CORSSEN, Ueber Aussprache, Vokalismus und Betönung der Lateinischen Sprache.' 2nd edition, 1868. (The authority for Latin philology, and the storehouse from which Peile, Roby, Wordsworth, and others mentioned below, have drawn much of their information.)

'Kritische Beiträge,' and 'Kritische Nachträge sur Lateinischen Formenlehre.'

CURTIUS, 'Grundzüge der Griechischen Etymologie.' 2nd edition, 1866. (The first volume of a translation into English by Prof. Wilkins and Mr. England, of Owens College, Manchester, has appeared.) 'Tempora und Modi,' an admirable treatise on the formation of Tenses and Moods in Greek and Latin. Berlin, 1846. (Now out of print.)

'Greek Grammar.' (Published in English as 'The Student's Greek Grammar.')

'Greek Grammar Explained,' or 'Elucidations;' a translation by Mr. E. Abbott of 'Erlauterungen zu meiner Griechischen Schulgrammatik,' published by Prof. Curtius in 1863, as a companion to his 'Greek Grammar.'

LEO MEYER, Vergleichende Grammatik der Griechischen und Latein

ischen Sprache.' (Especially valuable for its exhaustive collection of examples, from which the student can form his own induction as to particular formations.)

PEILE, Introduction to Greek and Latin Etymology.' (Macmillan, 1869.) ROBY, 'Latin Grammar (Vol. I) on Sounds, Inflections and Word-Formation.' (Macmillan, 1871.)

SAYCE (Rev. A. H., Fellow of Queen's College, Oxford), 'Principles of Comparative Philology.' 1st edition. (Trübner and Co., 1874.) WORDSWORTH (Rev. John, Brasenose College, Oxford), 'Fragments and Specimens of Early Latin.' (Clarendon Press, 1874.)

FERRAR, Comparative Grammar of Sanskrit, Greek, and Latin,' Vol. I. (The author's death unfortunately left the work half-finished before he had treated of Verb-Inflections.)

FARRAR (Rev. Dr., Headmaster of Marlborough College), Chapters on Language,' and 'Families of Speech.'

WHITNEY (Professor of Sanskrit and Comparative Philology in Yale College, U. S. A.), 'Life and Growth of Language.' (Published in England by H. S. King and Co., 1875.)