I think Ransom's point about the silliness of worrying where Hayek   
got those two words, and how (spontaneously?) he got them in that   
particular order is quite right. The discussion and his comment have   
inspired me, only a historian, to ask now (1) if Hayek really was a   
textual doctrinalist, and (2) if he could read and write only   
English? Actually, I know he was neither. But why do so many treat   
him as if he were a doctrinalist who knew only English? For   
historical (not doctrinal) antecedents of the idea you could just as   
well look into Fichte or Comte or Bentham or Spencer or Roscher or   
Menger or Schmoller (even if he totally misunderstood Menger's   
admiration of his school's work) or Wundt or Adolph Wagner, as Mill   
or von Mises.  
Besides, as usual in these discussions, the student's question is now   
forgotten, or ignored.  
  
John Womack