Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 30.djvu/735

Miss Watson did not become acquainted with these facts till it was too late to preserve a record of the language itself; but in the other case, a part of the language was preserved by a careful and scientific observer. This case occurred in Albany, New York, and was described, by Dr. E. R. Hun, in the "Monthly Journal of Psychological Medicine" in 1868. A little girl four and a half years old, the sprightly and intelligent child of cultivated parents, had been observed, when two years old, to be backward in speaking, "and only used the words 'papa' and 'mamma.' After that she began to use words of her own invention, and though she understood readily what was said, never employed the words used by others. Gradually she enlarged her vocabulary. . . . She has a brother eighteen months younger than herself, who has learned her language, so that they talk freely together. He, however, seems to have adopted it only because he has more intercourse with her than with others; and in some instances he will use a proper word with his mother, and his sister's word with her. She, however, persists in using only her own words, though her parents, who are uneasy about her peculiarity of speech, make great efforts to induce her to use proper words." Dr. Hun followed up this general description of the language with analyses of some of its words and other features. These two recorded instances of child-languages led Mr. Hale to further inquiries, which, though brief and limited, showed him that cases of the sort are by no means uncommon, and he cites a few other instances. In the light of the facts thus set forth, it becomes evident, says Mr. Hale, "that, to insure the creation of a speech which shall be the parent of a new linguistic stock, all that is needed is that two or more children should be placed by themselves in a condition where they will be entirely, or in a large degree, free from the presence and influence of their elders. They must, of course, continue in this condition long enough to grow up, to form a household, and to have descendants to whom they can communicate their new speech. We have only to inquire under what circumstances an occurrence of this nature can be expected to take place."

 

A Correction.—We find the following in "Science" of January 21st:

Popular science.—It is often very popular indeed. Here is an article on the voices of animals by Detler von Geyern (whoever he is), from Ueber Land und Meer, translated for the Popular Science Monthly, January, 1887, written in the good old traditional vein, quoting what anybody has said on the subject in a wonder-mongering way, as if every thing said and written must be true. And Herr von Geyern himself says, "Fish can produce no sound in water, because air is lacking as a medium to propagate the waves of sound; and yet we incline to the belief that water itself may admit of forming some kind of sound-waves which the fish may be capable of exciting, and which will be experienced and comprehended by other fish;" and he adds, "As far as we are concerned, of course, fish will remain mute," etc.—as if between fifty and a hundred species of fish are not known to make sounds, many of which have been described and explained by naturalists; and as if water and every other elastic medium were not well known as propagators of sound, often better than air,—a fact familiar to boys, who hold their heads under water, while bathing, to hear the loud sound made by the striking-together of two stones under water in the hands of a companion at a little distance.

_⁠

⁠Grinnell, Io., Jan. 14.

We very much regret that an error so obvious as the above should have escaped attention in the revision of the article in question; but we do not pretend to be infallible. The paper was accepted on its general merits as a bit of pleasant reading; and coming to us from an outside source, it could not receive that critical attention to every detail which our own translator is compelled, by the nature of the case, to give to each item of his work.

 

Self-Purification of Water.—F. Emich has carried out a series of experiments on the behavior of water when allowed to stand exposed to the air, and also when shaken up with air. He has further experimented with sterilized water, and on the behavior of waters submitted to the action of ozone and hydrogen peroxide. The self-purification of water, or the destruction of its organic and inorganic impurities, may be the consequence, either of a purely chemical process (oxidation), or of a biological process. It appears that, on exposure to or agitation with air, the