San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1888-08-21
WHENCE COMES SPEECH'
A STRANGE CASE RECORDED IN
A BOSTON NEWSPAPER.

Two Brothers Who Speak a New Ian
guage-A Parallel Case in the State o.
Nevada-The Children of the Bastile
| Freaks.
A Boston newspaper recently published ar
account of two brothers living in that city
who, it declares, have grown to mans estate
without ever being able to speak the English
language, although born in the United States
Of American parents, and having heard
English spoken continuously. Their vocal
organs have been examined by the best spe-
cialists and found to be perfectly normal.
These brothers, it is asserted, speak Ian
guage of their own, which they perfectly
understand, but which, thus far, has been
unintelligible to everybody else. Some words
of the language were given by the journal
referred to, and a philologist would trace a
resemblance, if nothing more, to Sanscrit.
But the case referred to is not without its
| parallel The writer Of this article saw, on
more than one occasion, two children, a
brother and sister, living at a little stage
station in the state of Nevada, who had in
vented language Of their own, which they
constantly used in talking with each other
The girl was 9 or 10 years of age, aud the
boy year or two younger. There could be
no deception and no mistake about the mat
ter. The children would play together and
chatter in this strange speech of their own
devising, and it was perfectly apparent that
it was not such meaningless gibberiSh as
children often use in play, but a genuine
language. 1t resembled no language with
which the writer had any acquaintance.
There conld be detected no resemblance to
any modern language, no similarity to root
forms or stems which may be said. roughly,
to be common to all spoken languages; nor
was there any likeness to either Latin or
Greek, and, consequently, none to the cog
nate language which is called Sanscrit.
The children were not at all shy about talk
ing in the presence of strangers but they
could not be made to understand what trans
lation from English into their language
meant They understood English, and could
and did speak it when spoken to; but they
either could not or would not give the equiva.
Tents of English words in their own language
The mother of the children said she could not
in any way account for this strange linguistic
freak. She said that the first time she heard
them, and indeed for many times afterward,
she paid no attention, as she supposed they
were ''only jabberng nonsense" as she ex-
pressed it, and so she Was entirely unable to
say whether the language was evolutionary
or whether the children spoke it just as we'll
the first time as the lest. They certainly
spoke enough of it when the writer heard
them to understand them without any diff
Guilty, although it seemed to the writer from
the cursory observations he could make that
the vocabulary was very limited one; but
hot how boz, 1lr- H.
children of that age had they been speaking
English.
There has been story in vogue for many
years, although it is impossible to verify it
and it is probably apocryphal, that for the
purpose of determining whether there was
primal language, and if SO what it was, two
infants were at one time confined in the Bias
tile and were never allowed to hear a word
of any language spoken, it being supposed
that nature would supply them with the
means Of communicating with each other as
they grew old enough to talk, and that the
controversy as to primal language would
be conclusively determined. The story says,
however, that up TO II years of age the chill
dren never uttered an articulate sound They
communicated with each other In a fashion,
but it was entirely by signs, and not by any
thing resembling q spoken language of any
kind The story goes on to say that they
were then released from their confinement
and placed among people where they heard
French spoken all around them, and that
they soon learned to speak the language
which they heard, but never gave any signs
of knowing any other tongue
The story may be true, or it may not, If
it is, it would tend very strongly to show
that our speech is the result Of imitation, and
that the faculty of articulate speech depends
on the ability to repeat what is gathered from
the speech Of others This view receives
confirmation from the observation of deaf
and dumb people, who are, as a rule, dumb
because they are deaf. They possess the
vocal organs fully developed, but they can
not speak because they are not able to imi-
tate either the sound Of language or the
mechanical vocal efforts of speaking persons,
and this, not because Of innate inability. but
because of the lack of a medium of intercom-
municatOn.
And yet the observation Of the cases in
Massachusetts and Nevada to which we have
referred shows that there must be exceptions
to what would seem tosbe a general rule.
Those children in Nevada knew no more of
CONTINUED on next psge.1