of the word (i.e., 'wind') and the derived or new sense (i. e., 'wall'). Similarly, Eng. weep (p. 76) is identical with Goth. wopjan, O. N. pa, which latter verbs, however, meant 'cry out,' 'shriek' (exclamare, vocare). In a more advanced stage of civilization when this primitive method of lamentation was less frequently resorted to, the English verb weep came to denote simply 'shed tears.' As an illustration of this extension of meaning (due to likhetsassociasjon) in living speech Professor Falk might have added Eng. cry (exclamare: plangere); cf. the colloquial Eng. bawl='cry out in a loud or rude manner' (cf. 'bawl out a name'): 'weep aloud.'

As an illustration of the figure of speech (due to likhetsassociasjon) contained in Norw. fatte, begripe (Lat. capere, comprehendere) Professor Falk cites (p. 80) the Norwegian colloquialism "jeg kunde ikke få tak i hans mening." We might add here the corresponding colloquialism in English, viz., catch on (='grasp,' 'understand').

Likhetsassociasjon may also result in 'the transference of meaning by analogy' (Navneoverføring ved analogi (sammenligning), p. 80-87). This category necessarily fuses with that of berøringsassociasjon. The word tongue can mean not only 'language' (i.e., cause to effect, cf. above I) but also 'projecting point of land' (cf. Germ. Landzunge, Norw. landtunge) by reason of the similarity in shape between these two objects (i.e., between the old and the new idea), cf. tongue and tong. Very often transference of meaning by analogy may take place from the inanimate to the animate; thus, O. N. drengr (p. 84) = originally 'thick stick' then 'brave, young warrior,' cf. Dan. pog 'boy' and Norw. påk 'stick,' 'cane.' We might add here the colloquial Eng. stick'stiff, stupid person' (cf. block-head).

III. Association as a result of connected discourse, limitation of meaning (Associasjon bevirket av talesammenhengen (betydningsinnskrenkning), p. 87–97).

Under this category Professor Falk treats those changes of meaning which are due to influences outside the word in question, as conditioned by the relation of this word to other words in the sentence (i.e., 'syntactical changes in meaning,' p. 89). By reason of the special relation of the word in question to other words in the sentence a special significance becomes attached to this word, whereby it suffers a restriction of meaning. But in such cases there occurs only a restriction of meaning and no actual change in meaning, in the sense that a new idea is expressed. Often that part of the expression is omitted with which the word was originally associated (Tankeellipse, p. 9093). This is particularly often the case in technical vernacular where the omitted element was once easily supplied. For example, from the huntsman's vernacular we have Eng. deer (originally = 'animal,' Germ. Tier) in the sense of a specific

type of animal, because other types of animals were seldom hunted by the English in olden days. We might add here Eng. hound a type of 'hunting-dog,' cf. Germ. Hund, Scan. hund.

=

If the word in question is an integral part of a phrase and comes to stand for the whole phrase itself, there occurs a 'syntactical ellipsis' (Syntaktisk ellipse, p. 93-97). As an example of this category Professor Falk cites (p. 94) O. N. at mins fodur (scil. húsi el. lign.), Lat. ad Martis (templum). We might add here parallels in modern speech, viz., Eng. at my father's (scil. house), and the more colloquial Swed. hos Wahlins, till Bergströms, etc.

IV. Word association due to similarity in form or meaning (Ordassociasjon begrunnet i likhet i form eller betydning, p. 97107).

Similarity (either in form or in meaning) between words may result in the establishment of a relation between them, which originally never existed. Changes (in form and meaning) due to this type of word association do not necessarily take place according to the regular phonetic and sematological laws. Hence result, for instance, contaminated forms and socalled 'folk-etymologies.' As an example of attraction between words, due to similarity of both form and meaning, Professor Falk cites (p. 105) O. N. velkominn for *vilkominn and Eng. welcome (cf. Angs. wilcuma). Possibly the association between wel- and wil- in the English word welcome was favored by the example of O. N. velkominn or of the French bien venu. At any rate, in connection with Eng. welcome Professor Falk might have called attention to the French bien venu. Modern Norw. dårlig (p. 105) originally meant 'foolish' (cf. dåre, Germ. Tor), but because of the association with O. N. dáligr, Norw. (landsmål) dåleg, it has now come to mean 'bad,' 'evil,' 'ill,' etc. In this connection it might have been of advantage for Norwegian students, if Professor Falk had called attention to the Swedish language, where the two words dårlig and dålig are still kept distinct from each other both in form and meaning. V. Changes of meaning due to emotional elements (Affektive betydningsforandringer, p. 107-124).

The associations between words thus far treated are the result of the representative or reflective faculties (forestillingsbegrep). But within the sphere of association we must also include the purely emotional element as an accessory cause or factor in the transition of meaning. The emotional element connected with words asserts itself in two ways, viz., unconsciously (uvillet) by virtue of that ethical valuation which is immediately connected with the word in question, and consciously (villet) by means of an arbitrary strengthening or weakening of the expression. While the ethical value of words is most often the

result of the prevalent social, religious and ethical views of the time, the intensity of feeling connected with this ethical value is generally the result of a momentary state of emotion. Under the head of conscious or arbitrary ethical valuation of words Professor Falk treats the following categories: Metaphor, Euphemism, Irony and Hyperbole.

Professor Falk's Betydningslære has done much towards satisfying a long needed requirement for a text book on sematology. The work indicates an advance over former works on this subject, at least in so far as Professor Falk here presents the first systematic exposition of the whole field of sematology. For American teachers of the Scandinavian languages and literature the book ought to serve as a very helpful guide in explaining the fine shades of meaning in Scandinavian words, particularly in poetic or dialectic words. Since the work is intended for use as a text book, its practical value could have been greatly enhanced if the book had been provided with an index. In a purely scientific reference book of this nature an index is greatly to be desired, for otherwise the reader has no guide (except his own faulty memory) to the individual words treated in the text.

The following misprints have been noted; for mhty. schel (p. 20) read mty. schel, for mnt. vôtboge (p. 72) read mnty. vôtboge (cf. index to abbreviations, mty. = middelhøitysk, mnty. = middelnedertysk).

Ags. medrece (p. 98) should read mýdrece. There is a form mêderce (Ms. J., cf. Bosworth-Toller's Angs. Dict. under mydrece) but this is hardly the form which Professor Falk had in mind, for the metathesis of the r in mêderce destroys the similarity between the last syllable-derce of the Angs. and the O. N. drekka.

That even a printer has difficulty with the Greek accent, is proved by the following: for rås oøpûs (p. 22, twice) read τὰς ὀφρῦς, for πνεύμα (p. 25, twice) πνεῦμα, for βίβλια (p. 92) βιβλία, for nygre. ποντικος (p. 82) ποντικός.

Professor Falk makes frequent reference to Low German (nty.) words which went over into the Norwegian riksmål. Most of these words, however, were loaned during the Middle Low German period, and it might, therefore, have been of greater advantage to the student, if in such cases the words. had been designated as mnty. instead of nty., cf., e.g., nty. schreve (p. 29), nty. funderen (p. 99), nty. stêf-(p. 106), etc. ALBERT MOREY STURTEVANT

Kansas University

L'ÉVOLUTION PSYCHOLOGIQUE ET LA LITTÉRATURE EN ANGLETERRE (1660-1914) par Louis Cazamian, Maître de Conferences à la Sorbonne, I vol. in-16, 9 frcs, Paris. (LIBRAIRIE FELIX ALCAN). 1920.

Through English Literature, as through the literary output of other nations, runs a psychological rhythm caused by the recurrent rise and fall of two dominants: one emotional, the other intellectual. Or-to apply terms rendered familiar by traditional psychology-by "feeling" and "intellect." Their obedience to the law that conditions their ebb and flow is not the result of determinable forces, but seems to be autonomous. When studied in the light of history, however, this rhythm appears constantly crossed by various outside influences, such as social factors, "collective memory" (i.e. the consciousness on the part of a given generation of the literary accomplishments of the past-a consciousness which tends to muffle the vitality of a new movement), etc. Furthermore, the individuality of each nation cannot help affecting the operation of the rhythm, so that the manifestations of the latter are bound to differ in different countries. For instance, modern English literature finds in Romanticism-i.e. in predominantly emotional forms-its full and natural expression; while modern French literature is drawn as by a magnet to Classicism, i.e. to forms colored predominatingly by the intellect, and only there is perfectly at home.

Despite its complexity, the functioning of this oscillationone is tempted to speak with Goethe who recognized a similar law in all nature, and say, of this systole and diastole-is by no means a thing imponderable to criticism. In fact its study proves fruitful in several directions. (pp. 4-23). The method here applied is plainly a blend-not lacking, however, in elements of originality-of the theory of environment formulated by Taine and more recent ideas promulgated by Brunetière, by M. Cazamian himself in his "Etudes de psychologie littéraire" 1913, by Professor W. A. Neilson in his "Essentials of Poetry" 1912 (pp. 1-4) and by others, among whom the name of Dilthey ("Das Erlebnis und die Dichtung" 7th ed. 1921) should certainly not have been lacking. In his premises M. Cazamian naturally finds himself at variance with some of the principles underlying Prof. H. A. Beers' "History of English Romanticism in the Eighteenth Century" (p. 142).

The author begins with the year 1660, i.e. with the Restoration. For, since English literature first became conscious of itself during the preceding period, the age of Elizabeth, which was a time of exuberant Romanticism, the Restoration marks the first swing of the rhythm. Between the time of Shakespeare and our own the rhythm has operated only two

and a half times. We can distinguish five principal phases. First the age of Elizabeth, second the period of the pseudoClassicism that came with the Restoration, third the great reaction in favor of emotion and imaginativeness during the eighteenth and the early nineteenth centuries, fourth the decades between 1830 and 1880 when the reign of science by fostering fidelity to truth and self-control brought about something like a second "classicism," and fifth and last the advent of a third period of Romanticism since 1880 in which mysticism, intuition, and imagination have again claimed a large share of attention (pp. 11-13).

To prove his thesis, M. Cazamian in chapters two to eleven traces in detail the gradual approach and recession of the two dominants "feeling" and "intellect" turn and turn about, exhibiting especial care and skill in discussing the operation of social forces. Thus the contrast is well brought out between the effect on English literature of the rise of the merchant class about 1680 (pp. 70 ff.) and the increase in power of the same social group in 1780 (p. 150). In the seventeenth century the bourgeoisie compounded with the nobility—a fact clearly reflected in Pepys' Diary (p. 77). Further, precisely because of its bourgeois qualities, this new class so far from encouraging a swing of the pendulum in the direction of Romanticism contributed to balance and self-control by insisting on the purification of morals and in a round-about way of literary taste. One hundred years later, the bourgeoisie had grown to be the natural enemy of prevalent tenets social and aesthetic and hence became the chief buttress of revolution.

No less interesting are the chapters dealing with the decades preceding the Romanticism of 1800-30 in which the comparative slowness of the emotional swell is attributed to the continued power of the aristocracy and its ally, the high bourgeoisie. The treatment of the second period of English Classicism (1850-1880), the generation of Matthew Arnold with its striking analogies to the age of Pope and the subtle yet fundamental differences that divide the two (pp. 218 ff.), and the closing chapter (pp. 242 ff.) which discusses the growing complexity in contemporaneous letters, are perhaps the richest in ideas. We are made aware that in the last thirty years the literary movement could not swing full circle on account of the ever increasing weight of collective memory which reduced the carrying power of the swing towards neoRomanticism and caused almost a stagnation of the rhythm. Under the circumstances the realism of today is bound often to be glamoured with romance and our present day Romanticism to reveal powerful substrata of realism, and frequently the same individuals must be exponents of both. Although,