ART. I. -- UTILITY OF LANGUAGE IN DEVELOPING THE MIND.
67. As men are composed of body and soul, they require an exterior sign to communicate their thoughts to one another; the most perfect sign is that of language. -- Man is made to live in society; but, since his intellect is joined to a body, he must make use of a sensible sign to communicate his thoughts. This sign may be of several kinds; of these the easiest and most perfect is language; by it he can communicate the greatest number of things with the greatest clearness.
68. Language is not absolutely necessary either for the direct or the reflex action of the intellect. -- The intellect has in itself the power, by abstracting ideas from sensible images, of immediately perceiving first principles and of deducing the consequences of its first cognitions; therefore, it is not absolutely necessary that these cognitions and their consequences should be communicated to the mind by language.{1}
69. Language is very useful, and even morally necessary, for the development of the intellect and for the acquisition of the greater part of our knowledge, especially of that which relates to spiritual things and to moral truths. -- If we consider the intellect in itself, we see that it requires a sensible image for the formation of the idea. But, as experience proves, this image formed by the imagination may also be an obstacle in speculative operations. But speech performs the essential function of the sensible image without having its inconveniences; for it furnishes a very simple sign not susceptible of being confounded with the idea, and easily concentrating the attention, since the words of a language are uniform and constant. Hence speech is very useful in the development of the intellect viewed in itself. But if we consider it in relation to other intellects, we must allow that speech is the principal means by which the greater part of knowledge is communicated in a prompt and easy manner, especially that knowledge which relates to spiritual things and to moral truths. Besides, every science requires the efforts and labors of many ages for its formation. How, then, could it be transmitted or enlarged, if language were not at the service of the savant to enable him to communicate to others the result of his labors?
ART. II. -- ORIGIN OF LANGUAGE.
70. Speech is of divine origin. -- This is proved: (1) by Holy Scripture and the traditions of nations; (2) by the silence of profane history about the invention of language and the time of its invention; (3) by facts of philological science. The fact of the origin of language is settled, but several hypotheses are offered to explain how man received the gift of speech.
Among these hypotheses, the simplest and most rational is, that man received from God the faculty of speech as he received reason and the organs of speech.
71. The invention of language would not have been absolutely impossible to man. -- Rationalistic philosophers, especially of the Sensist school, maintain the possibility of the invention of language, but in the sense in which they explain it, it is an absurdity. Other philosophers, as J. J. Rousseau (1712-1778), De Bonald and Ventura, have maintained the absolute impossibility of the invention of language. But of the reasons which they give some are false, and others are not wholly conclusive.{2} Hence many eminent philosophers see no metaphysical impossibility in the human invention of language.
{1} Speech or language may be defined as "the communication of our thoughts to others by means of words or articulate sounds used by consent as signs of our ideas."
{2} These are grounds on which they base their theory: 1. Language is absolutely necessary for thought, and therefore for the invention of language. But since language implies society, man cannot acquire ideas without society. 2. Language is the efficient cause of ideas; or at least the occasion of perceiving innate ideas. 3. Man cannot of himself acquire ideas and language; he needs a revelation.
But to this we reply that the invention of language is morally, perhaps even physically, impossible, since words have an arbitrary, not a natural meaning. Men should indeed unite to form a language, but language is an indispensable condition of their being united. Even if it be granted that one man may make himself understood by others who do not speak his tongue, it is yet true that this is effected by natural signs only. Since God has willed man to live in society, He must have given him the indispensable medium of intellectual communication, viz., language. This is the opinion of Humboldt and of Cardinal Wiseman.