— 17 —
less blended, less closely aggregated; and that,therefore, they keep themselves more independent, than in the Indo-European languages.
« The root, as a rule, remains invariable in all derived words, and each suffix also keeps its form and invariable application:— and from this results, on the one side, great regularity of forms, on the other, great complication. For instance, in Turkish, lar(or ler) is the form of the plural;-to it are joined terminations or particle-suffixes, which form the cases of the singular number, and there may still be inserted pronominal elements, indicative of possession; thus:— ev, house, ev-den, of a house; er-üm-den, of my house;— ev-ler, houses; ev-ler-üm-den, of my houses.
« The verb presents an analogical and still more striking example.—There are a few modifying elements, that may be inserted, either isolated, or grouped in different ways, between the root and the terminations, to express passivity, reflexion, reciprocity, causality, negation, impossibility, etc.
« The distinction between verbs and nouns is not quite so original and fundamental, as in the Indo-European languages. The words used, as verbs, are scarcely distinguished from nouns, that
