Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1871-05-19

Rulloff yesterday paid out the just penalty Of
his crime. In few cases can the execution of the
death penalty be regarded by the community
with less regret or repugnanee. His guilt is I'M
questionable; his reform was not to be looked
for and even in the matter of philology on his
discoveries in which he based his appeal for par
don-he is proved a charlatan and shallow pre-
tender. The idea Of any benefit coming to the
community from his being allowed to work out
his system of philology is amusingly absurd.
Professor Sawyer, of Utica, New York, who
seems to be an accomplished scholar, visited
Rulloff only three days ago. He is not credu-
lous seeker for marvels with limitless capacity
for swallowing them, but careful, intelligent
candid observer This is what he reports as
Rulloff's statement of his system:
The perfect root is double, each root being
triliteral, continuing ayowel, liquid, and a mu-
table. Thus the perfect root has always these
elements, but the perfect root is seldom appar-
ent as such. But to form words, the liquids
may be interchanged among themselves or with
the mutables, and Utce UerSd. The vowels usu-
ally interchange with each other, but by no def
mite rule that can at present be determined. In
place of giving lists of words all coming from
the same root, as is put down in his manuscript,
from which, too, he transcribed portions in his
petition to Governor Hoffman, dated April "a
will give, what have not yet seen in print, some
examples of the application of his method as ap-
piled TO single words. From amictus, clothing is
derived directly; tunica, tunic, and this affords,
he says, beautiful illustration of his method.
Thus we take from the first word the letters I, u,
/, C, a. These all being found here, the n of the
second word is plainly substituted for the m of
the first, both being liquids. Yet at first he had
said that amictus itself was nearly perfect
with a mUtahp substituted for
and the a merely prefXed. Upon my asking
whether the final of tunica represented this
initial of amictus, or was an ending and not
part of the root, he answered unconcern-
| edly "ohl it may be one or The other,
am not sure Of that. You must remember my
| system is not perfected, and must pardon any
| little inaccuracies of mine. | will observe
| here, though the observation will seem unnec-
| eSSary to the mereSt tyro in etymOogy, the alb
surdity of Transporting letters in this arbitrary
| way from one part of one word to make up an
other, needless whether an ending, or a partici-
| pial affix as tn thus reappearS as component
part OF new root, and also whether an ele-
ment, as a, reappearing in derived word, not
being essential in the first word, is in the
second part of the root, or an afflx The trans
mutation of the M into n he supported by no
linguistic law. The final of the first word is
rejected; not because it is termination, but as
not necessary. To follow out this one example
ofderivation, is to explode the method, as not
only futile, but absurd. But to proceed: From
umbra is derived jubar, and again the author
described this as one of the most striking exam
pies of his methods. How significant that the
word meaning the "shade of night should be
transformed into a word meaning "the morning
twilight" "Yet how plainP The u and of
the one we have in the other. Then transpose
rd and you have ar, while the j and M are
readily seen to be interchangeable. When asked
by what law these seemingly arbitrary changes
are made, we were told that the "necessity of
the case" was the guide. He showed us many
lists of words all formed, as he explained, by his
method, sometimes tracing a root through the
Greek, Latin, English and German, in what
seemed an utterly arbitrary way. He stated as
special adjunct of his plan the discovery that
one word may be derived from another by writ
ing it backward. The great principles of
the method may be most fully traced in
the Greek, as the most finished of all languages,
in the older Greek not so fully, just as the older
English is less developed and harsher. When
asked again by what rule the elements are in
terchanged, the answer was, elements lacking
IN the one form as compared with another are
to be freely supplied, and wherever changes are
necessary, such are to be freely made" When
asked who was the arbiter of these changes, he
said the former of the language, that is of the
Greek, which is the principal civilized speech
according TO which, as a pattern, others are
formed. When still further pressed as to the
origin of the Greek language. he affirmed that
time, went deliberately to work and made the
form 6dr-bdn. He added, in answer to a fur
ther question: Eyes, they were phlolopists
with malice aforethought and prepense.' This
he said with great glee, the more noticeable
from his usually impassive features, AT an
other time he stated that the system CONSISTED
of manipulating form that has two roots. We
were now supposed to be somewhat initiated
into the "gredt method" and he appealed to
us to know whether it ought to be lost to the
world.
In regard to his knowledge of language and
writers in foreign tongues Professor SAWYER
says:
When suggested to him how much had been
accomplished in the study of the cognate lam
guages by comparison of forms of later deve-
opment in the Greek and Latin with in some
cases, earlier forms in the Sanscrit, he said he
had nothing to do with the Sanscrit, that he
meant, with a smile, no disrespect to that Ian
guage, but ii had nothing to do with his
method. That the Sanscrt was earlier in any
oil It's forms than the Greek he said was stuff.
when asked whether the relation between the
Latin and Greek was that of brother and sister
he said the Greek was undoubtedly the parent
of all Latin forms. Turning next to the CLASH
cal languages, with which we said we under
stood he was familiar, helannounced that parts
of Xenophon he knew by heart-that the Odys-
sey he had read through; that he had read the
first books of the Iliad dozens of times. "Other
authors" he said indefinitely, che had read"
In place of asking him TO repeat from memory,
! suggested various passages, beginning with
Theocritus. l began with odes which are in
Felton's Greek Reader, as thus: Do you remem-
Der the ode wherei the dove is SO charmingly
questioned? He did not. then quoted, but he
did not follow, nor seem to appreciate the mean.
ing. | then remarkedl how poetical was Ho-
mer's expression, where he sings of the
smiling of the sea. He assented, but could
not obtain the pOrrpgnnndinU Crock No
spoke Of the smile in the Iliad, where the
marching of the hosts Of warriors is compared
70 % many swarms Of bees. He said ii was beau
tiiul passage, but did not venture upon word
OF tne original. also referred to the passage
mnere tne agora is said to be moved as when a
zephyr passes over the heavily laden prainfield.
b9i SUI not word Of the original. After some
other conversation returned to the classics. and
lnstaneed the versein which Virgil is said to have
80 successfully initiated the sound of horses