Re-constructing ideology, Part one: Animadversions of John Horne Tooke on the origins of affixes and non-designative words
Fredric Dole~al
J Introduction
John Home Tooke occupies a unique place in the hi!)tory of Indo-European studies and lexicography - ohlivion: Only rarely in discussions of lndo Europcan linguistics and lexicography does one find a mention of the unre doubtablc, irascible. and scioli~tic champion of comparative and historical language study: but then. why ~hould a sciolist and purveyor of fanciful ety mologies he mentioned at all '? If we acknowledge the widely accepted propo sition that 'linguistics-as-we-know-it' began "1th Franz Bopp. then Home Tooke need not be considered at all. HoweH:r. this proposition can be main tained only by interpreting the history of linguistics as a progre,~ion of meth ods and theories that lead inextricably to a particular school of thought. Most linguists in the waning years of the twentieth century are comforted by the co incidence of the progression of linguistic knO\vledge with our contemporary theory of language. I hope to show in this essay the complex of issues that follow from a read ing of Tooke's The dfrersivns of Purley. Studies of the palit twenty years or ~o have concentrated on philosophical and political reputation and influences. 1 I present a brief biographical sketch. a summary of some necessary comments on Tooke the philosopher and Tooke the political figure . and a description and illustration of Tooke the theorist of language. Because there i~ relatively so lillle comprehensive and detailed work on the history of linguistics of any period, the methods and principles of language theory presented here cannot be exhaustively described and explained. In other words. the idea~ published in Tookc's two volumes ddy a reductive explanation. We do not arriYe at the prcM~nt stage of historical linguistics by following either an unhroken e\·o lution of knowledge, or by charting a succession of intellectual paradigms. Further. linguistic ideas are not autonomou~ or easily separated from 1heir ~odal context. A carefully considered analysis of the social. political. and 262 f, rNJr,r I Jo/r;J1l
. f the late eighteenth century ru, it pertafo~ to Ian O intellectual rn. iJ,cu c
I tru, I that Lhc,c note,. and the few thJI arc \.C~lltcred through the v.ork. "'JII 11 01 he thought foreign to JI\ dc,1gn. whether the} coincide " 1th Mr Tooke. or propo.,c cx plana11on" differing from tho....c whrch he ha, given. h 15 CJ'E OF His C,Rl!A1 P.X Tooke'~ methods and theorie~. if not hi<; re~uJ~. have some important con grucncics with Bopp and ~ome of ht<. fell ow San,kritists and Germanists: In the cffort to bring order to the hi~torical record. we concentrate on difference and downplay ~imilari ty ~o tha1 period~, epoch,\, and paradigm<; migh1 be crcatc<.l a<-. di,tinct a~ a national border. In North America It i~ a common place to al.i!\ert a Kuh nian influenced analy1,is of linguistic hi~tory that neate, a revolution of thought that not only marginalia\, but tri\ ializc\ most. 1f not all, work before the publication of Noam Chom~ky'~ Sr11tactic strucrum. There ~hould be no wonder. then. that hi,torical lingui,tic~ it~clf doe~ fl()( hold a central po~ition m the di~cipline today. In order to hold a place m the prc~cnt epi~teme, Mal wart~ of diachronic ~tudie, w,11 place the &rround '.1.00: oJ the revolution at the time of Bopp. Ra,k. and the Grimm,: to admit an~ work hcyond that would invite the ridicule of the MandanJ hearer.,.: Re-construcring ideology 263 I wiJJ not an~mpt to place Home Tooke in a Kuhnian-style drama of paradigm formation or dec~y • Because the DiverJ·ions was a financial suc cess for the author and evidently had a varied readership, we should not reduce the influence or reputation of the text to its impact on historical com parative philology in England (or elsewhere). Without a method to determine the transmission of knowledge or the sociology of this transmission, there can only be impressionistic speculation founded upon our own beliefs about the past and abou~ the im~rtance of our scholarship. There can be no doubt that his work was rnfluent1aJ for a number of years in England; the nature of this influence, however, has not been fully explored. Two questions are consid ere 1.1 Biographical sketch The following words from The memoirs of John Home Tooke are recorded by A]exander Stephens who was befriended by the 62 year old Tooke. The meeting described below occurred at the end of Home Tooke' s public career: The year 1798 proved a busy and important one to Mr. Tooke. The first part of the 'Diversions of Purley' had by thj s time obtained a considerable degree of circulation and celebrity . . . A second edition . . . was indeed called for by the general voice . . . This work . . . contributed not a little to enhance his reputation, and . . . it tended greatly to improve his fortune also. The volume in question includes, among the additions, the copy of an original Jetter from Mr. Pitt to the author in 1782; and also some bitter allusions to the political conduct of Mr. Windham . . . It was soon after this period, also. that I first f requt!nted the house of Mr. Home Tooke .. . Instead of finding a man equally repulsive in his manners and appearance, as some had taught me to expect. 1 was most agreeably disappointed, at the first interview, to be received with the politeness of a well-bred gentleman . . . When I first saw him. he had already passed the meridian of life, and his dress, which savoured of the old school, seemed to 264 Fn•dric /Jo/,,:.al add an air of dignit y tn hi., convcr~auon. I It, <.: oat, which corn,l\tc By 1798 he already had taken order, in the ( 'hun.: h of England and h· left his preferment (pries~ of Brentford); he had tried un~ucl.:c1i,.fully lo ~ admitted to the bar three time~; he had_become a mcmhcr of parliament, onl be removed within day~ of hi~ clct:tron hy vote of the Hou -,c of Comm Y 10 . h I . on\ he had been imprisoned two separate tm~c, . t c ate ... t tomrng in 1794: He wa~ arre~tcd in J 777 for publi~hing a plea for money to 'be applied to the relief of the widows. orphan~. and aged parent~. of our hcloved Ameritan fellow subjects. who ... preferring death ~o ~Ja very. were ... inhumanly murdered by the king's troops at or near Lexington and Concord . . ' (Cowper 1781- 672-689). Tooke wa~ convicted and confined for twelve month 1i ; he wa~ arrested, jailed for ~even month\, and ultimately acquitted of high trca,un in J 794 (an intercepted letter ~aying in part. 'Query, •~ It po~1i iblc to get ready by Thursday?' wa~ interpreted a~ a call to arm1o., - the French Revolution being the topic of the day - but in fact wa~ ~hown to be a request to meet for dinner). He was not treated well in pri~on. However, by the time Stcphcm met him, Tookc's friend~ . political allies, and payment~ from hi~ pubfo,hcr allowed him to live in financial ~ecurity for the remainder of hi~ life. In the case of Horne Tooke, we mu~t indulge our\elve~ the privilege of learning some of the detail of his life - the language theory and philo~ophy cannot be separated from the context of situation, so to ~peak. Jn fact. the Diversions of Purley might be appropriately read a~ the author\ intellectual biography. In this spirit we will look at another de~cription of the man that tends to support the rather adulatory memoir~ of Stephen~. William Ha1li11 offers this account in The .\pirit of the age (publi~hed a, part of Hazl itt I 932) : His education and accomplishment~. nay hi ~ political opinion~. were of the la,t age; his mind, anJ the tone of hi ~ feeling~ were moda n ... It wa., <:unou, to hear our modern ~cioli~t advancing opinions of the 1110~1 radical kind withoul any mixture of radical heal or violence, in a tone of fa..,hionahk nmll'halance. with elegance of gesture and allitudc. and with the mu~t pcrfcl'l good-humour . . . he 100 often shocked the prejudices or wounded the ~el f- low of thmc ahout him, while he himself displayed the same unmoved im.hffrrem:c or cquamm1t y He said the most provoking things with a laughing gall'ly. and a polite at1en11 un. Re-constructing ideoiOK)' 265 that there wa:-. no withstanding. He threw others off their guard by thwaning their favourite theories, and availed himself of the temperance of his own pulse to chase them into madne)I~. He had not one panicle of deference for the opinion of other),,. nor sympathy with their feelings; nor had he any ob~tinate convictions of his own lo defend . . . He took up any topic by chance, and played with it al will, like a juggler· with his cups and balls. He generally ranged himself on the losing side; and had rather an ill-natured delight in contradiction. and in perplexing the understandings of others. without leaving them any clue to guide them out of the lahyrinth into which he had led them . .. and could maintain almost any opinion. however absurd or fantastical. with fearless impunity. (Hazlitt 1932: 47-48) When we wonder how Tooke· s word histories could be so successful for so long (even after the new comparative philology taught and published in Germany), part of the answer might be found in the public's awe - even fear and trembling - of Tooke's prodigious ability to humiliate his intellec tual adversaries. Another point need~ to be recognized: Home Tooke was a public figure: he had no institutional connections lo the English academy. He had received a Master of Arts from Cambridge. but that degree led him into the clergy (though it would have just as readily lead him into a legal career). Notwithstanding the existence of the gentleman-scholar career path. Tooke does not appear to have had any meaningful influence in the Eng lish university system. On the other hand, no one can doubt that his public included some of the most important politicians, philosophers. and literary figures of the day. The word histories in themselves did not attract the de voted following, rather the theory and manner of presentation of the theory was compelling: His work at once provided a perceived intellectual basis for utilitarianism, democratic governance. and the people· s ownership of the English language (to couch the impact in current terms). not to mention the challenge to conventional thinking concerning grammar. Epea pteroenta, or the diversions of Purley would probably not have been written had it not been for the first trial and incarceration of Home Tooke: · . .. the description and existence of the crime, actually turned . . . on a nice grammatical question, relative to the precise meaning of two or three words in the text!' In Tookc's own words in the first volume of the Dfrersions he tells us 'all that I have further to communicate on the subject of language. has been amongst the loose papers in my closet now upwards of twenty years; and would probably have remained there twenty years longer: and have been finally consigned with myself to oblivion. if I had not hcen made the miserablt! vi~tim of two pn.~positions and a conjunction' (I: 74). The book was written as a vindication and as an attack on his enemic~ as well a:-- J - 266 Fredric /)o/e:,al full -scale intellectual a~sault on ~ome of the w~ll-accepted grammarianli and . h f language including James Harns (Hermes); Lord Mon'-- Jd p hI 1osop crs o , . . uvu o ( o,;,:in and progress of /m1xuaf.:e): B is~op L?wth (A short mtroduction to the EnRlfah /an~ua~e) and his personal bcte n_otre. Dr. ~amuel Johnson. Gi ven the complexity, not to mention the perplexity, ?f the ~ssu_e~ and ~rsonalitie\ that arc intertwined in the background of Took~ s mot1va~1on1i and mtellectual development, we should be careful not to qmckly asc~bc. or perhap\ ever ascrihe. "the intention of the author": but let us let him speak in hi~ own voice for now: The officiating priest~ !the officers of the court]. indeed. were them~ lve.., of rank and eminence sufficient to dignify and grace my fall. But that the con junction 1 HAT. and the preposition\ O f and CONCERNING. words which have hitherto been held to have 110 meaning. ~hould be made the abject in~trumcnb of my civil extinction. (for ,uch wa.-. the intention. and ~uch ha~ been the con sequence of my prosecution ) appeared to me to make my exit from civil life as degrading as if I had been brained by a lady· c; fan (I: 74 -75 ). Here we see the combination of grammar and politics. Home Tooke di rected his audience's attention to the confusion caw.,ed by the generall y ac cepted notions of language theory: Prepositions indicate operation~ of the mind. are particles, and thm, ha\·e no autonomou~ meaning. The danger~ inherent in the accepted grammar are then ~ketched by Tooke: For mankind in genernl arc not sufficiently aware. lhat words, without meaning. or of equivocal meaning. are Lhe everla~ting engines of fraud and inJustice: and that the grim1(ribber of Westminster Hall. is more fertile. and a much more formidable source of imposture than the abracadabra of magicians (I: 75). There are a handful of highly insightful articles and chapters on the impor tance and ultimate non-importance of Home Tooke the philologist. I briefly mention two of the more detailed analyses: Hans Aarsleff (l 96 7: 44-114) and Olivia Smith ( 1984: l l0-153; see also Butler I 984 and Prickett 1989). 1.2 Influence and reception of Horne Tooke I will not endeavor to provide an account of The dil'ersions of Purley. nor a critical review of the secondary literature. The reader is referred to the existing essays by Aarsleff ( 1967) for a summary of the work. Aarsleff con centrates his attention on the intluence of Tooke a~ traced in the works of Re-constructing ideology 267 Jeremy Bentham and hi s followers; he also gives us a . . n accounting of one of Tooke's better adversanes, Dugald Stewart· Stewart attacks th , . . . . · · . e matenabsm' that he viewed as the unstated ph1losophical foundation of th . . , . e 0 tverswns as well as the etymological metaphysics'. According to A ff , h . .. . ars Ie , . . . t e source of th 1s etymo1 og1ca 1 metaphysics", as he appropriately d • [. , f ·1· ca 11 e 1t, 1s found] in Loe ke s am, 1ar ~tatement that "it may aJso lead us a little towards the original of all our notions and knowledge, if we remark how great a dependence our words have on common sensible ideas"' ( 1967: I07 ). Home Tooke reportedly had three books available to him during his incarceration in the Tower: Essay concerning human understanding, by John Locke; An essay towards a real character and philosophical understanding, by John Wilkins; and The consolation of philosophy, by Boethius; I have seen his copies of the books by Wilkins and Locke. Both carry various markfogs by Tooke (under linings, pointing fingers, exclamation points. written comments. and notes). While the influence of Locke on Tooke is well known. the possible points of influence from Wilkins (including Tooke's marginaJia) deserve separate treatment and will be discussed in a forthcoming essay. Aarsleff may be correct when he asserts that 'For the study of language in England, it is an historicaJ fact of the utmost importance that Home Tooke was adopted by the Utilitarians . . . and language study remained philosophical rather than historical or philological much longer than on the Continent ... ' (1967: 96) . The troublesome part of Aarsleff's analysis of Tooke can be found in his too narrowly focused attention on those who ·adopted' Tooke; he seems to find the meaning of the Diversions in one community's interpretation of it. This group of so-called materialists and uti]itarians did not merely adopt Tooke's ideas; they had to transform the work according to their needs. Here we have a good example of critical interpretation constructing the intention of the text. If we can rely on Home Tooke at all (and this is a serious question given his socially transgressive behavior), then an examination of his words would indicate that the Benthamites subverted Tooke· s intellectual cause: 'Perhaps it was for mankind a lucky mi stake (for it was a mistake) which Mr. Locke made when he called his book, An essay on Human Understanding. For some part of the inestimable benefit of that book has, merely on account of its title, reached to many thousands more than, I fear, it would have done, had he called it (what it is merely) A Grammatical Essay, or a Treatise on Words , or on language' (I: 31). . Tooke at the beginning of his text provides his own critical in~erpretat1on in order to reconstruct Locke's intention; the preceding statement includes, of course, the ever-present Tookian sarcasm. We should also note that _there is more than a little knavery in thi s comment on the name Locke ga, e his book. 268 Fredric Dolezal Ej'>ea pteroenta. or the diversions of Purley does not particularly contribut to truth in labeling. Hazlitt wrote that 'Many people have taken it up as ~ description of a game_ others supposing it to be a novel' The human mind. or the human understanding, appears to be c.1 grand and noble theme : and all men. even the mo~t in~ufticient. conceive that to be a proper object for their contemplation: whibt inquirie~ into the nature of Language (through which alone they can obtain any knowledge beyond the beaMs) are fallen into such extreme disrepute and contempt. that even tho,e who "neither have the accent of Christians, pagan. or man." nor can speak so many word'i together with as much propriety as Bal~am's alis did. do yet_imagine words to he infinitely hcncath the concern of 1hc1r exalted under~tandrng. The study of language may have been thwarted as a consequence of the acclaim surrounding the Di1•ersions. Curiously. 'the deplorable state of philol ogy in England' (Aar~leff 1982: 11 2), required scholars to accept the results of Tooke's research rather than the gencrnl method and guiding principles. The role of imperial xenophobia and overt racism in slowing the study of Sanskrit, for instance. cannot be ignored either; the romantics and utilitarians amongst others. are not known for inclusive egalitarianism. (This opens an~ other set of problems that we cannot addre~~ here: the romanticized Orient _ the usefulness of Eastern products.) The case regarding the state of language study is far from simple or clear. Olivia Smith (1984: 142-143) presents a different perspective: The most folr]ward-looking ideas of Tooke's theory - hi~ attempt to di~tinguish the study of language from that of the mind and to formulate a political analysi1.i of language - were the mo~l challenging and the least developed . . . Dugald Stewart [the Scottish philosopher] arrives al an impasse by asking that the study of language proceed in two contrary directions. that it limit it~ concerns. and also that it maintain class distinctions. Smith wants to add the political purposes behind the Di\•ersions to our understanding of its influence and reputation. She accordingly emphasizes a different interpretive community than does Aarsleff. A comprehensive knowl edge of Tooke and the study of language in England (and elsewhere) will require a look into all expositions on language (g rammars. dictionaries), in duding, for example, the preface to the lyrical ballads (Wordsworth & Co leridge 1798). Philology (including what we now call literary interpretation. criticism. and theory) has never been a unified discipline; we must remem ber that the Diversions contains many passages of canonical literature with lfr-nm.Hructin,< ideology 269 interpretations hascd on a thc~)ry of (reconstructed) language. Some reader~ of Home ~ookc valued the philosophy of grammar not only a~ an instrument for analysis. but also as a~ argument for a broader ownership of the Engfo.,h language {Butler 1984; Pnckctt 1989; Smith 1984) . If we study language theory through the tyrannical ti ltcr~ of authorial intention. paradigms. and epistemcs, we impose our own constructions of ideologies that hecom~ the accepted conceptions of proper method~ and argu ments. In North America there arc department~ of literature and departments of linguistics, hut there are no departments of philology (and within the de partments of literature and linguistics little attention is paid for the most part to language theory and historical-comparative linguistics). But we must leave this discussion for another time. Suffice it to say that our twentieth-century constructions of canonical texts (and, conversely. texts that are marginal-to the-point-of-dismissal) skew the way we understand the reception of ideas, and thus create a self-legitimating and self-important history of the transmis sion of knowledge. Not unlike many older works on language theory, our reception of Horne Tooke's Diversions is reliant upon scholarly hearsay: [f the book is known at all, it is known for its fanciful etymologies. While there can be no doubt that Horne Tooke reconstructed English without the benefit of the techniques of comparative philology-~ or an awarenes~ of Sanskrit, we can find in tandem with the madness that follows from his limited knowl edge, a method of comparative analysis that has merit because it relies on data from specified editions of old texts;4 a system of sound correspondences (though crude); and a hypothesis for organizing the data - all of which made the claims falsifiable (and fanciful) . The method is many times defeated by the philosophical grammar that informs the motivation fur the work; on the other hand, scattered throughout the two volumes are cogent (as well as vituperative) critiques of contemporary and earlier grammars and theories. 2 The comparative historical method of John Horne Tooke 2.1 Etymology has secondary importance According to several passages within the text. the etymologies are not the primary focus. The reconstructions and word histories arc presented as ev idence for the general theory of language. Tooke ( 11 : 40 I) says. 'For I am not here writing a dictionary ( - which yet ought to be done. and of a very 270 Fredric Dolezal different kind indeed from any thing ever yet atte"!pted anywhere), but only laying a foundation for a new theory of language. At the very end of y01 _ ume II he makes in an off-hand way what perhaps must be interpreted ~ an extraordinary admission: 'The explanation and etymology of these word5 [in ; out; on; off; and; atj all require a degree of knowledge in all the antient northern languages, and a skill in the application of that knowledge, which 1 am very far from assuming' (II: 456). His Socratic partners do not have the presence of mind (or are not created with the ability) to ask why this is not a deficiency for the hundreds of other words he analyzes. His confessed lack of expertise in Germanic languages is secondary to his belief that Latin partially borrows from the 'northern' languages: Tooke says that he had in mind to make two separate lists of Latin - one list would show the Greek influence and the other list would show 'all that could be clearly shewn to be of Northern extraction.' He does not consider the possibility of a language common to the Northern languages and Latin and Greek. The other major flaw that weakens the total work more pointedly redounds to Tooke's discredit: He relies almost totally on evidence no older than Middle English, most especially the works of Chaucer. There are only a few textual citations from the Anglo-Saxon period. Though he is often acerbic, witty, tendentious, entertaining, and wrong, a reader without the requisite knowledge of pertinent languages, principles of sound change, and primary texts would not be able to easily refute the etymologies put forward by Horne Tooke. 2.1. l The Grammar of signs and sensations Since the theory motivates the overall analysis (' . .. it was general reasoning that led me to the particular instances; not particular instance to the general reasoning' I: 130-131), we will briefly look at the fundamental principles: we will note again that the principles themselves are the primary incentive for establishing the etymologies: Tooke says that he is no 'farther concerned with Etymology, than as it may serve to get rid of the false philosophy received concerning language and the human understanding' (I: 148). A central prin ciple that Horne Tooke puts forward requires the grammarian to go beyond simple description to find an explanatory cause before delineating categories ('Grammarians to whose genius it is always more obvious to remark a mul titude of effects than to trace out one cause ... · I: 148). We will see below how this principle informs his critique of certain passages in Johnson ·s Dic tionary. He turns this argument against the plethora of grammatical categories found in traditional and so-called philosophical grammars that were known to his readers: Re-constructing ideology 271 And at the same time we shall get rid of that farrago of useless distinctions into Conjunctive. Adjunctive, Disjunctive, Suhdisjunctive, Copulative, Negative copulative, Continuative, Subcontinuative, Positive, Suppositive, Causal, Col lective, Effective, Approhative, Discretive, Ablative lthe list goes on J, Declar ative, etc. etc. etc. which explain nothing: and (as most other technical terms are abused) serve only to throw a veil over the ignorance of those who employ them (I: 11 I ). It should come as no surprise that Tooke has found an explanation that will serve to reduce grammatical categories from countless (because gram marians 'confined themselves merely to notice the differences observable in words, without any regard to the things signified·) to two - the noun and the verb. According to his theory, all other syntactic categories are derivable [historically and morphologically] from these two. There is an interlocking chain of principles that leads to this assertion. Horne Tooke believes that we must first consider the purpose of language before we can adequately describe it. He avoids explaining or considering how language originated by calling our attention to its function. First, we use language to communicate our thoughts: second. we desire to communicate efficiently, that is, we want to communicate 'with dispatch' . He poses this rhetorical question: 'Philosophers have calculated the difference of velocity between sound and light: But who will attempt to calculate the difference between speech and thought! ... ' (I: 28). In order to bring our speech closer to the speed of our thought. we need 'abbreviations·. thus the pre-title of the Diversions: Epea pteroenta 'winged words· . Words acquire wings through the process of abbreviation, for · Abbreviations are the wheels of language, the wings of Mercury' (I : 25) . Tooke describes the three sorts of abbreviations in language: I. In terms. fHe refers the reader to Locke's Essay5 for an illustration: e.g. abstract tenns, complex terms.] 2. In sorts of words. [This is the focus of the Dirersions~ i.e. grammatical categories (morphological class markers. etc.).] 3. In construction. [Syntax; e.g. syntactic ellipsis.] The nature of the sign itself creates the possibility of abbreviation: We are relieved from carrying around sacks of "things'' we wish to refer to (unlike the scholars in the Swiftian land of Laputa). Of course. the high utility of the sign for discour~e does not come without its weaknesses. Those Laputians had sacks of referentiality to avoid error~ for as Tooke says. 'there is nothing more productive of error when we neglect to observe their [signs} complica- 272 Fredric Dolezal tion. • While grammarians have debated whether signs refer to things or ideas, they have erred by not noticing that 'many words are merely abbreviations employed for dispatch. and are the signs of other words' (I: 26) . The concept of abbreviation has two interlocking components: ( 1) Language users have developed abbreviations out of necessity _(efficienc_y of dis_course) ; and (2) all elements of language have a core meaning a_ssoc1_ated with them; therefore, not only do particles, prepositions, and conJunct10ns have meaning in the same way as nouns and verbs, but also iden~ifiab!e PA_RTS of words [bound morphemes J. One such example that Tooke 1dent1fies 1s -/y: All adverbs ending in LY ... are sufficiently understood: the tennination (which alone causes them to be denominated Adverbs) being only the word LIKE corrupted . . . I which isJ more pure and distinguishable in the other sister lan guages. the German. the Dutch. the Danish. and the Swedish: in which it is 6 written lich, lyk. /yg, liga (I: 460) We see in the citation above some of the basic methods and arguments: (I) The part of speech called the adverb arises out of the necessity for ab breviation; the suffix -ly is a sign for another sign. like: grammarians create a part of speech to account for surface level di\'ersity. (2) The suffix has a core meaning found in like. (While he does not make the consequent argument that like is a preposition that also is a historically motivated derivation of another sign, one can speculate that Tooke would have connected the preposition to the Old English verb lician - a sign of a sign of a sign.) (3) Comparative analysis is employed. (In the continuation of the passage on -ly we can find another one of the techniques of analysis employed by Tooke. the use of evidence from English dialects: 'And the Encyclopredia Britannica infonns us, that - "In Scotland the word Like is at this day frequently used instead of the English termination Ly. As. for a goodly figure. the common people say, a goodlike figure."') The use of the term 'corruption' in the passage may signal to linguists a theory lost in pre-scientific metaphysics. Tooke refers to most sound change in the history of a language as a corruption. but at the same time insists that the change indicates a 'perfection' of language. Do we find here a Kuhnian style tension of paradigm shifting, or does this sort of theorizing set us up for one of Horne Tooke's politico-etymological jokes? Must we break into pieces that which we would perfect? Compare this with the more typical model of corruption: Since the High German of the 13th century shows nobler. purer fom1s than the language of the present day. and those of the 8th and 9th centuries are Re-cnmtruc ri,11< ideoloxy 273 purer still than those of the 13Lh. and finally since the Gothic of the 4th and 5th centuries shows even more complete forms. so it follows that the language spoken by the Gennan people in the first century will have surpas!>ed even Gothic (dtcd in Steger 1968: 18; translation in Amsterdamska 1987: 36). Archaic terms such as ·corruption' are probably objectionable becau~c t11ey seem to imply an evaluative approach to language study. However, the process that ·corruption' refers to is not unknown to our own theorie~: ·Phonological weakening', 'attrition', and 'phonological decay' may sound infonned to our ears but they are based on similar figurative principles. Tooke combines the process of 'corruption' with a general hypothe!)is about lan guage. Certain so-called parts of speech and inflections originate a~ a re~ult of a tendency to abbreviate. We might say, '. . . decay of phonological sub stance has its roots in the articulations of individual speakers of a language, particularly in rapid speech, where often drastic simplification of form oc curs. as a way of transmitting the same message in a shorter time .. . ', and conclude that 'phonological decay becomes fossilised in the lexicon via rapid and then connected speech ["external sandhi"] rules' (Hall 1992: 97).7 Our use of 'decay' and 'weakening' does not imply an ethical, moral, or political evaluation of the process, nor does Tooke emphasize an evaluative reading of 'corruption' . However, any use of terms that have emotionally charged connotations in ordinary language could carry with them residual implica tions. The penchant for botanical figures of speech in linguistics resides not in history but in current practice. The labored and ingenious etymologies of Horne Tooke have obscured the principles that support them: sound change (based on phonetic analysis), comparative analysis, and the relation between sound and meaning. It is obvious that he did not study hard enough. On the other hand, do we have criteria that establish Bopp as the source for idea~ that can be found in the Diversions, or do we prefer to find our sources in places that justify our science? Horne Tooke was determined to prove through historical and empirical proof that what philosophers and grammarians called abstraction, particles. and other functional clements of language (prepositions. conjunctions, etc.) were nothing more than signifiers of concrete nouns and verbs. Along the way he did make some interesting observations on lexical meaning. He did not reduce his argument to a simplistic statement about finding the ''true meaning .. in the etymology of a word, though this sentiment surely is present; howeYer. the standard notion that this sentiment represents i~ subverted many time~ by his philosophical and political agenda. The oft-quoted proof for the meani ng of n):hrs leaves one more with a deconstruction than a reconstruction. 274 Fredric Dolezal Before we leave this discussion, it should b~ noted that th_e philosophical · th t Tooke supports with the histoncal comparative data can be assumption a . . , .h - • · II found in ·an antient and well known position : Nt l 1 ~n mte ectu quod non • · [·nothi·ng (exists) in the intellect which (does) not (exist) pnus 111 sensu • • . • . , . . earlier in sensation,]. He mentions this ant1ent dictum m order to broaden Locke's thesis on the origin of ideas. When applied to language (and Tooke asserts that Locke neglected this point), we would predict that all words have core meanings directly attributable to sensible referents. The prediction becomes realized when we understand the history of words. All languages will conform to this rule, but will vary because the signs of signs are a variable in the history of each language. So-called ·corruption' must be a universal characteristic of language; as we have seen. corruption creates the possibility for more efficient discourse. We cannot develop all the relevant points that are a consequence of the discussion of methods and principles, but it is worth presenting a clear statement of the connection between the material world and our abstractions: But when we consider. that we have. and can have. no way of expressing the acts or operations of the mind. but by the same words by which we express some corresponding (or supposed corresponding) act or operation of the body: when (amongst a multitude of similar instances) we consider that we express a moderate desire for any thing, by saying that we incline (i.e. Bend ourselves) to it; will it surprize us, that we should express an eager desire. by saying that we LONG, i.e. Make long, lengthen. or stretch out ourselves after it, or for it? especially when we observe. that after the verb To incline we say Tv or Tmrards it; but after the verb To long we must use either the word For or After. in order to convey our meaning.8 In an article in the Quarterly review (Anonymous l 835: 319) we find an exa~ple of the criticism directed at Tooke that went beyond the dismissal of his etymologies. It is interesting for its discussion of the method aboYe (and the_~rgum~nt for the superiority of the Inda-European languages oYer the Semitic, which needs to be defended against Tooke, the leveler): We find in all languages a num be r o f wh at are commonly called abstract no. un.s .... Tooke's peculiar gram ma. 11· ca I an d metaphysical notions rendered h1m anxious to get rid of them . . · . · · · O ur senses, 1t 1s true. cannot discern them. except as attnbutes of a m· t · b. · . d . a ena1 O ~ect: but the science of oeometry proves that th e mm 1s capable of c · · e nicety of ct· • . . . onceivmg them abstracted/v . . . the facili tv and 1scnmmat1on with wh· h h · · Sanscrit Greek . nd G ic t e 1nd0-European tongues - especially · , a erman - are c apa. bl c o f expressin. g them, add greatly Re-constructing ideology 275 to their richness and beauty, and give them a marked superiority over all the Semitic family. 2.2 The method illustrated We know that many of the etymologies in the Diversions are mistaken (and sometimes silly). Notwithstanding the danger of being an etymological meta physician, I conclude this paper with examples that represent Home Tooke's method and argumentation. The primary sense, or core meaning. of an inte gral word (a noun or verb) has its origins in the way a referent is perceived as sensation - abstractions, transferred meanings, and other secondary sig nifications are derivations of a particular substantive (concrete) term. Since this principle can be found in a variety of earlier texts,9 let us proceed to a specific analysis and look at ward. WARD (I: 408-415) With this selection Tooke combines evidence from ( 1) Anglo-Saxon and French; (2) Chaucer; (3) parallel logical development in Latin; (4) contem porary English; and (5) his theory of knowledge: (I) 'Ward, in the Anglo-Saxon [ward) or [weard) , is the imperative of the verb [wardian], to look at; or to direct the view. It is the same word as the French garder ... ' (2) ' . . . and so Chaucer uses it where it is not called a preposition. "Take REWARD of [i .e. Pay regard to or Look aga i11 at] thyn owne valewe, that thou ne be to foule to thy selfe." - Parson's Tale. Fol. IO 1. pag. 2. col. 2.' (3) 'It is the same in Latin: Tutus. guarded, looked after, safe, is the past participle of Tueor, Tuitus, Tutus . SO Tutor. he who looks after.' (4) 'So we say either, - Guard him well, or, Look well after him. In different places in England, the same agent is very properly called either a Looker. a Warden, a Warder, an Overseer, a Keeper, a Guard. or a Guardian.' 'Our common English word TO reward, which usually, by the help of other words in the sentence. conveys, To recompe11ce. To bene_fit in re turn for some good action done ... it may convey the signification of punishment l''Reward them after their doings''); 27fl l·rnlr/l' /Joln11/ · h ·t I ,·mp,,rt ... well calculated: for it is no other than Re- <~) f or wt 11 c.: 1 , rca 1- ~ .. , · I k av,a,·n wt 'ch will be either benefit or the contrary ~aruer, 1.c. 1o oo ,., • • • 11 . . , , ac.:cording to the cJ<.:tion or c.:onduc.:t whic.:h we review. 'Jookc then tum , his argument to the English suffix -ward, which he points out urn he ·with cyual propriety joined to the name o~ any p~rs~n, pl~ce or thing. lo, or from which our view or sight may be d1~ected. Hts evidence come, from ( 'hauccr, (jower, and Thomas Lupset (Of dlynge well) ; for exam ple Nom11 ward11 , Canterburywarde, outwart, rr_,~arde, f-!o':1-wa~d, an_d ~od ward. Thu, 'toward' may he called a prepos1t1on but 1t 1s a termination' derived from a vcrh and 'always retains one single meaning .. . ' 2.2.1 Core meaning and context Tooke did not study etymology for the purpose of identifying the 'genuine meaning' of a word, though there are elements of this ancient approach wi thin his method. l:. vidcm:c from hi,torical rec.:ords was used to support his the," con<.:crning the nurnhcr of parts of speech; the evidence supposedly , upportcd hi, argument that what we know we know from our senses and that our idea, arc actually terms that describe the relation between the world and our perception of the world. If we say that. according to Tooke, a word's etymology rc veab it~ meaning, it does so in a more complicated manner than i~ , uggc,tcd hy thi ~ a,scrtion. For example, the etymology may reveal that a word 's meaning (and grammatical category) must be understood as an ahhrcviation (underlying meaning or subaudition in Tooke s terminology) that refer, to another ,ign; thus even so-called particles have meaning. Also. clement, of words (suffixes) may in fact be remnants of other words. While he doc\ attrihutc a core meaning based on etymology to every word. his thC',ry accounL, for apparent polysemy by showing how a word may have a variety of application~. The context in which a word appears governs the way we interpret mean ing. 'J,,okc critici1.cs Johnson on more than one occasion for confusing con text of the ,cntcnce with polyscmy. He makes an argument for what we call ~on,,,cmy: A dictionary should evidently provide the original form and ~ean~~g of a con~mpo~ary word and illustrations of its range of applica wm . I he explanation of the history of a word provides the semantic and logical hr! names of n·al objects, how coul 1. These figs came FR< >M Turkey. 2. That lamp hangs l·ROM the cieling bicj. 1. That lamp is falling I-IH>M the cieling. He daims that •1 ,.ROM means merely BHilNNIN I. Turkey the Place of Bl·.CilNNIN Evidence from Johnson 1755 is presented. Twenty different senses of from arc listed, including Privation, Descent or Birth, Ground or Cause, Derivation, and Removal. Tooke insists that they all retain invariably one and the same single meaning: •... And by the same manner of transferring to the preposi tion the meaning of some other word in the sentence. have all Johnson's .. . supposed different meanings arisen.' We see that meaning in language develops from a relationship between lexical meaning and context. Furthermore. Tooke's thesis concerning the ori gin of this preposition is based upon an incomplete analysis of the histori<.:al record (as usual). However. a better knowledge of the derivation of from would probably have provided some encouragement for hi~ thesis: 'The pri mary sense is .. forward'' . . . From the sense ·•forward" were developed those of .. onward", "on the way", "'away". whence the transition to the preposi tional use is easy' (OED). Tooke doc~ not rely on etymology to cstahlish proper usage, but to support his theory of language. His u~e of ·etymology· implies a historical process not a static measure for 3 Conclusion A reading of Horne Tooke that does not ~onsid~r the range of i~eas, remarks, gestures, implications, innuendoes, and mtent10ns that compnse the Diver sions will lead us into too simple a_ regard ~o~ the work. N~t unlike Bopp and Schlegel, he attempted to explain the ongm of gram~at1_ca] categories; he asserted that suffixes and similar compounds were as significant as word stems. Like them he understood language to undergo change and variation, but unlike them he posited a genera] law that governed the development of language through time. Of course, it is well known that he did not have a tech nical approach to the data he gathered. Perhaps his theory of language would have more respect if he had been able to construct a hypothesis concerning the origin of certain parts of speech by appealing to proto-reconstructions rather than reconstructions that could be falsified by analysis of empirical data. In any case, Tooke was not trying to reconstruct the pure language of the undecayed and uncorrupted past, but rather was attempting to reconstruct a language that was the proof of an ideology of knowing the world. We should always be wary about making any sort of daims concerning Tooke's ideas and his influence. I can best make this point by quoting two nineteenth-century sources published after his death. One from Richard Tay lor, the editor of the ]ast regularly published edition of the Diversions, and the other from Wi11iam Hazlitt in a biographical essay. It is also worthy of note that two dictionaries were published that were directly influenced by Tookian etymologies (and perhaps other principles): Richardson (1835) and Noah Webster (I 828). The former is now just a curiosity, the latter stands for the highest authority of North American lexicography. The following ci tations give us reason to consider how far Tooke was assigned to oblivion and how far into oblivion we must go to follow Tooke: It is to be regretted that those who claim credit for founding new grammars and dictionaries on the principles of Mr. Tooke, should make them the means of diffusing and perpetuating all his errors in detail. (Tooke 1860 [Taylor·s edition]: xxiii [Taylor's editions copiously amend the errors.]) ... it was his delight to make mischief and spoil sport. He would rather be axainst himself than for any body else. (Hazlitt 1932: 51 ) I would be remiss if I did not point out that Tooke's influence on language theory can be found in the twentieth century: Charles K. Ogden specifically mentions the influence of John Wilkins on John Home. Horne Tooke on U,,.('(murw 11111( 1dn1fo11t 27'J Bentham, and of all three on Basic l:ngli 1-. h 111 Ji . . · ,ut thi , mu, t wmt for ~noth(!r essay. Notes I. Sec especially Aarslcff 1967 1982 Butler I 'JX4 fl · k . ~ , · · . . ' ' • m: Cit I 'JX'J, t1nd C.,m1th l 'J)S4 2. An instance of tim.hng sources for cuntcmpor.1ry th L.. .. • • . . . c,,ry <.:a n ,,c found in Jfa ll J'J'J2 85ff: A crucial question, )..eldom addrcs,c References Aarsleff, Hans . . l 967 The study of language in England: 1780-1860. Pnnceton: Princeton Univer- sity Press. From Locke to Saussure: essays on the study of language and intel) , 1982 . . . f M' . p ectuaJ history. Minneapohs: U111vers1ty o mnesota ress. Amsterdamska. Olga 1987 Schools of thought: the development of linguistics from Bopp to Saussure Boston: Reidel Publishing Company. · Anonymous J 835 English Lexicography. Quarterly Review 54: I 08: 295-330. Bopp. Franz 18 I 6 Ueber das Conjugationssystem der Sanskritsprache in Yergleichung mit jenem der griechischen, lateinischen, persischen und germanischen Sprache. Frankfurt a. M.: Andreaische Buchhandlung. Butler. Marilyn 1984 John Home Tooke. In: Burke, Paine, Godwin, and the revolution contro versy, ed. by M. Butler, 18-22. New York: Cambridge University Press. Cowper. Henry J 783 Reports of cases adjudged in the Court of King's Bench. pp. 672 -689. London. Dolezal, F. F. M. (ed., Thematic Section) I 994 The meaning of definition. In: Lexicographica 8. ed. by F. F. M. Dolezal, A. Kucera, A. Rey, H. E. Wiegand, W. Wolski, and L. Zgusta. 1-289. Tiibingen: Max Niemeyer. Giv6n, Talmy 1971 Historical syntax and synchronic morphology: an archaeologist's field trip. Proceedings of the Annual Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic So ciety 17: 394-415. Hall, Christopher J. 1992 Morphology and mind: a unified approach to explanation in linguistics. New York: Routledge. Harris, James 175 I Hermes. London. Hazlitt, William 1932 Completed works of William Hazlitt, ed. by P. P. Howe. 11 : 47- 57. London: J. M. Dent and Sons. Johnson, Samuel 1755 A dictionary of the English language. London: W. Strahan. Kaisse, Ellen M. I985 Connected speech: the interaction of syntax and phonology. Orlando: Aca demic Press. Re-constructing ideology 281 l(iparsky, Paul 1982 Explanation in phonology. Dordrecht· Fo · p bl• . · ns u . 1cat1ons. Lakoff, George 1987 Women. fire. and dangerous things· What cat · ...... · · egones revca 1 about the mmd. Chicago. University of Chicago Press. Lakoff. George, and Mark Johnson I980 Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Locke. John 1690 An essay concerning human understanding. London. Lowth. Robert I 762 A short introduction to English grammar. London: A. Miller and R. J. Doo ley. Martinet. Andre 1964 Elements of general linguistics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Monboddo, James Burnett I 773 -1792 On the origin and progress of language. London. Ogden. Charles K. 1940 The general Basic English dictionary, giving more than 40,000 senses of over 20,000 words in Basic English. London: Evans Bros. Prickett, Stephen 1989 Radicalism and linguistic theory: Horne Tooke on Samuel Pegge. Yearbook of English Studies 19: 1-17. Reddy, Michael J. 1979 The conduit metaphor. In: Metaphor and thought, ed. by A. Ortony, 284-324. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Richardson, Charles 1847 f 1835] A new dictionary of the English language. Philadelphia: E. H. Butler and Co. [Originally published as part of the Encyclopedia Metropolitana. 1835 .l Schreyer, Ri.idiger 1994 The definition of definition in Locke's Essay concerning human understand ing. In: Dolezal 1994: 26-51 . Smith, Olivia 1984 The politics of language: 1791 - 1819. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Stephens, Alexander 181 3 Memoirs of John Horne Tooke. Two volumes. London. Repr. 1968, New York: Burt Franklin. von Schlegel, Friedrich 1849 The aesthetic and miscellaneous works of Frederick von Schlegel. Translated by E. J. Millington. London: H. G. Bohn. Steger, Hu go (ed.) . 1968 Jakoh Grimms Von-eden zur Deutschen Grammat1k von 1819 und 1822. Darmstadt: Wi sscnschaftliche Buchgcsell schaft. 282 Fredric Dolezal Tooke, John Home . . . 1806 Epea pteroenta, or the diversions of PurJey. London: 1 1798 ' · ·· · f P J r.:c.1 · · John 1860 Epea pteroenta, or the c.J1vers1ons o ur cy. c llcd by Richard la ~m. don: W. Tegg. Y0 r. L'1J. Webster, Noah J 828 An American dictionary of the English language. New York : S Whitney, William Dwight · Converse. 1892 Language and the study of language: twelve Jectures on the . . linguistic science. New York: C. Scribner's Sons. PnncipJe\ of Wilkins, John 1668 An essay towards a real character and a philosophical Jan Same! Gellibrand. guage. London: Wordsworth. William, and Samuel Taylor Coleridge 1798 Lyrical ballads. London. Zgusta. Ladislav 1986 Grimm, Littre, OED, and Richardson : A comparison of th . . , 8 e1r h1stori . Catu ~k osyam. o1ct10nanes· . . : 74-93. c11y: 1989 The Oxford English Dictionary and other dictionaries (A ·k k , . · 1 a osyamJ national Journal of Lexicography 2: 3: I 88-230. · 1nt er. Historical, Indo-European, and Lexicographical Studies A Festschrift for Ladislav Zgusta on the Occasion of his 70th Birthday edited by Hans Henrich Hock Mouton de Gruyter Berlin New York 1997