the considerations by which these questions were settled were three in number:
reason,etymology and the example of Latin and Greek.
reason was commonly taken to mean consistency or,as it was called,analogy.
analogy appeals to an instinct very common at all times in matters of
languages, the instinct for regularity.
the more consistent are its principles,the more it is of a piece with itself,
the more commodious it will be for us.
consequently, where one expression could be paralleled by another in the
language it was commonly preferred for that reason.
when etymology plainly points to a signification differnt from that which the word commonly bears,propriety and simplicity both require its dismission.
- 1 decade agoFavorite Answer
這些問題使我們考慮到三個因素: 推理, 語源, 和拉丁,希臘文的先例.
推理曾被廣泛的視為: "有系列的連貫"(consistency), 或者所謂的 "類推"(analogy). 類推在語言上是自古以來似乎很常見的一種本能,一種使有規律的本能.
當這推類的法則(原則) 愈有連貫, 它本身就愈完整, 我們就愈容易看出其演化.
如此, 我們能比較容易的在這語文中找到其他的同義文字, 這也是我們總是希望看見較有類推連貫的語文的原因.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
當語源(字根)明顯的顯示出和這字所具有的一般的意思, 和性質有很大的不同時, 就必須摒棄這兩字有關聯的可能性.