Introduction.

...alarmed, and not clearly seeing how the matter should be established, he turned to altogether different things. original Latin: "territus, nec satis videns quomodo res sit instituenda, in alia omnia abivit."

The same author on pages 78 and 79 mentions others who have dealt with this art. original Latin: "Idem p. 78. 79 aliorum meminit qui de hac arte egerunt." In the cited passage on page 33, Dalgarno explains that if a concept is broken down into all its smallest parts, it might be impossible to recognize the original compound concept from these minute components. Regarding this, Leibniz remarks: It is one thing to scatter the parts, another to consider them distinctly; nor is it necessary to turn the mind toward every minute detail simultaneously; it is enough that the character is so composed that it may be subdivided at one’s own discretion. original Latin: "Aliud est dissipare partes, aliud distincte considerare, nec opus est, ad omnes minutias animum simul advertere; sufficit characterem ita compositum esse, ut suo arbitrio subdividere liceat." Leibniz argues that a logical language doesn't need to overwhelm the user with every detail at once, provided the structure allows for deeper analysis when needed. — In the referenced passage on pages 78 and 79, Dalgarno mentions the Oxford professor Seth Ward and the London citizen Franciscus Lodwick, both of whom had produced similar work.*)

Wilkins made further use of what Dalgarno had discovered in the aforementioned work from the year 1668. Both Wilkins and Dalgarno start from the same principle: a rational classification of all possible concepts; corresponding characters are then to be found to express them. Instead of the 17 classes of concepts established by Dalgarno, Wilkins assumes 40 classes (genera The broad categories or "families" of ideas in Wilkins's system.), which in turn break down into "differences" (subdivisions), usually six each; these latter are then usually each divided into 9 species The specific individual concepts within the broader categories.. Although Wilkins thought it desirable that written marks might be invented which bore a resemblance to the objects they expressed, he nonetheless recognized the impossibility of a universal pictorial script A writing system like hieroglyphics where the sign looks like the thing it represents.. He devised a system of the simplest possible conventional signs, which he called a Real Character (a term already used by Dalgarno). For the 40 established main classes, Wilkins devised 40 arbitrary signs; to denote the subdivisions, he added small strokes to the main signs, which are distinguished by the position where they are attached...

*) Since Dalgarno, as already mentioned above, makes use only of letters—thus seeking to create a script that is universally intelligible—he is rarely mentioned by Leibniz. Leibniz's own project, the "Universal Characteristic," aimed for a mathematical representation of logic rather than just a practical common alphabet.