A translation of the table of chemical nomenclature / proposed by De Guyton, formerly De Morveau, Lavoisier, Bertholet, and De Fourcroy ; with additions and alterations ; to which are prefixed an explanation of the terms, and some observations on the new system of chemistry.

  • Guyton de Morveau, Louis-Bernard, 1737-1816.
Date:
1794
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: A translation of the table of chemical nomenclature / proposed by De Guyton, formerly De Morveau, Lavoisier, Bertholet, and De Fourcroy ; with additions and alterations ; to which are prefixed an explanation of the terms, and some observations on the new system of chemistry. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The University of Leeds Library. The original may be consulted at The University of Leeds Library.

    56/74 (page 46)
    thofe who ftudy the new fyftem or theory of Chemiftry, and that with proper explanations both are more eafily learnt, even by per- fons but little acquainted with Greek and Latin, than the former terms and old fyftem ; and therefore I can confirm Fourcroy's affertion, that a much fhorter time is now requifite to learn Chemiftry than formerly. rt This >effe<ft,” fays the writer of the Dictionary, <( of a ” few Greek terms is the more extraordinary, as it is not produced <( on cloiftered ftudents devoted to erudition, but on audiences, ** compofed of ladies as welt as gentlemen, and felecfted from the cf polite circles of Paris.” It would be ridiculous to impute the tafte of the polite circles of Paris for Chemiftry to a few terms from the Greek, but it feems reafonable to account for it from the many new and beautiful experiments, from the clear and juft method of arrangement, from the fatisfaeftory explanations afforded by the new principles, from the fimplicity and juft import of the new No- menclature ; and alfo from the eloquence of the popular lecturer Fourcroy. There is no juft ground of fear that, ” from the zeal for reforming ** language, fuch a number of reformers may arife, that our ears ** will not be lefs ftunned, nor our underftandings lefs perplexed, ,c than if we were expofed to the clamour of Babel, or the thaw of “ words of Sir John Mandeville for the diftinguilhed fuperiority of a fyftem produced by a De Guyton, a Lavoifery or a Bergman, would furely fuperfede the work of perfons of inferior ability.