2nd. I am wrong—for what? for appearing, in the eyes of J. B., to have done that which I have not done,—for bringing in links of "the Indo-Germanic languages," which I have neither done, nor can do.
3rd. "The word is solely and peculiarly Greek." Let me give only one etymon by way of preparation for my answer. Let us take the word mouse. Well, it comes from the Latin mus, which comes, you will say, from the Greek μυς, and there are many clever etymologists, excepting a few, with J. B. and myself, would say, "it is solely and peculiarly Greek;" but we go up to the Sanscrit (the mother of European languages), and bring forward mush, a mouse, and here is the terminus—and why? because mush signifies to steal, and therefore sufficiently describes the nature of the little animal. Now, because we cannot find an existing link between the Greek and Sanscrit, is that a reason for asserting αδελφος to be of pure Greek origin? No; and if J. B. will only recollect that all words in Sanscrit, excepting bare primary roots, are compounded after the same manner as αδελφος or rather δελ-φ, he will, I hope, find that I have not been wrong in my etymon. Moreover, let J. B. prove, if he can, what is the meaning of δελφ in the Greek, unaided by any other language.
4th. Why is the Sanscrit bhratre brought into the contest? perhaps to prove what has not been proved, viz. that it also signifies frater uterinus.
5th. "How happened it that the word φρατηρ was lost in Greek?" Why, because the Greeks thought it too barbarous a word to own, as coming through the Latins from the barbarous Goths, Scandinavians, &c.! Let us pass over irrelevant matter till we come to
6th. J. B.'s authoritative rule, "that no apparent similarity between words in the Semitic and Asian (read Sanscrit) families can be used to establish a real identity, the two classes of language being radically and fundamentally distinct." Vide mouse, and a hundred more roots, that might quash this rule.
To conclude, I did not introduce the Sanscrit dal into my former note, because, I suppose, an idea passed through my mind that I might offend some "interesting points in Greek manners."
I have only one more remark to make, which is, that the Sanscrit bhra-tre is a compound word like δελ-φυς. I will give the full etymology of this word bhra-tre, to prove that J. B. has done wrong in bringing in a word to militate against his own rule. Persian, bra-dar; Sanscrit, bhra-tre; Gothic, bro-thar; Islandic, bro-dir; German, bru-der; Swedish and Danish, bro-der; Anglo-Saxon, bro-ther. Now, will J. B. prove that the Hebrew, Chaldee, and Syriac בר, bar, a son, is not connected with the Persian and Sanscrit bra and bhra? If he does, I shall doubtless be edified.
T. R. BROWN.
Vicarage, Southwick, near Oundle.