"Clay, not dead but soulless,Though no mortal man would choose thee,An immortal no lessDeigns not to refuse thee."
"Clay, not dead but soulless,Though no mortal man would choose thee,An immortal no lessDeigns not to refuse thee."
"Clay, not dead but soulless,
Though no mortal man would choose thee,
An immortal no less
Deigns not to refuse thee."
In the following words, all of which are compounds, we have true specimens of the doubled consonant.
It must not, however, be concealed, that, in the mouths even of correct speakers, one of the doubled sounds is often dropped.
§ 132.True aspirates rare.—The criticism applied to words likepitted, &c., applies also to words likePhilip,thin,thine, &c. There is therein no sound ofh. How the so-called aspirates differ from their corresponding lenes has not yet been determined. That it isnotby the addition ofhis evident.Phandthare conventional modes of spelling simple single sounds, which might better be expressed by simple single signs.
In our own language thetrueaspirates, like the true reduplications, are found only in compound words; and there they are often slurred in the pronunciation.
EUPHONY AND THE PERMUTATION OF LETTERS.
§ 133. 1. Let there be two syllables of which the one ends inm, and the other begins withr, as we have in the syllablesnum-and-rusof the Latin wordnumerus.
2. Let an ejection of the intervening letters bring these two syllables into immediate contact,numrus. Themandrform an unstable combination. To remedy this there is a tendency to insert an intervening sound.
In English, the form which the Latin wordnumerustakes isnumber; in Spanish,nombre. Thebmakes no part of the original word, but has been inserted for the sake ofeuphony; or, to speak more properly, by a euphonic process. The word euphony is derived fromεὖ(well), andφώνη(fônæ, a voice).
§ 134. In the wordsgiveandgavewe have a change of tense expressed by a change of vowel. In the wordspriceandprizea change of meaning is expressed by a change of consonant. Inclotheandcladthere is a change both of a vowel and of a consonant. In the wordsto useanda usethere is a similar change, although it is not expressed by the spelling. To the ear the verbto useends inz, although not to the eye. All these are instances of thepermutationof letters.
Permutation of Vowels.
Permutation of Consonants.
Inhaveandhadwe have theejectionof a sound; inworkandwrought, thetranspositionof one.
Permutation of Combinations.
It must be noticed that the list above is far from being an exhaustive one. The expression too of the changes undergone has been rendered difficult on account of the imperfection of our orthography. The whole section has been written in illustration of the meaning of the wordpermutation, rather than for any specific object in grammar.
ON THE FORMATION OF SYLLABLES.
§ 135. In respect to the formation of syllables, I am aware of no more than one point that requires any especial consideration.
In certain words, of more than one syllable, it is difficult to say to which syllable an intervening consonant belongs. For instance, does thevinriver, and theeinfever, belong to the first or the second syllable? Are the words to be divided thus,ri-ver,fe-ver? or thus,riv-er,feve-r?
The solution of the question lies by no means on the surface.
In the first place, the case is capable of being viewed in two points of view—an etymological and a phonetic one.
That thecandrinbecome,berhymed, &c., belong to the second syllable, we determine at once by taking the words to pieces; whereby we get the wordscomeandrhymedin an isolated independent form. But this fact, although it settles the point in etymology, leaves it as it was in phonetics; since it in nowise follows, that, because thecin thesimplewordcomeis exclusively attached to the letter that succeeds, it is, in thecompoundwordbecome, exclusively attached to it also.
To the following point of structure in the consonantal sounds the reader's attention is particularly directed.
1. Let the vowela(as infate) be sounded.—2. Let it be followed by the consonantp, so as to form the syllableāp. To form the sound ofp, it will be found that the lips close on the sound ofa, and arrest it. Now, if the lips be left to themselves they will notremainclosed on the sound, but will open again; in a slight degree indeed, but in a degree sufficient to cause a kind of vibration, or, at any rate, to allow an escape of the remainder of the current of breath by which the sound was originally formed. To re-open in a slight degree is the natural tendency of the lips in the case exhibited above.
Now, by an effort, let this tendency to re-open be counteracted. Let the remaining current of breath be cut short. We have, then, only this,viz., so much of the syllableāpas can be formed by theclosureof the lips. All that portion of it that is caused by their re-opening is deficient. The resulting sound seems truncated, cut short, or incomplete. It is the sound ofp,minusthe remnant of breath. All of the soundpthat is now left is formed, not by theescapeof the breath, but by thearrestof it.
Thepināpis afinalsound. With initial sounds the case is different. Let the lips beclosed, and let an attempt be made to form the syllablepaby suddenly opening them. The sound appears incomplete; but its incompleteness is at thebeginningof the sound, and not at the end of it. In the natural course of things there would have been a current of breathpreceding, and this current would have given a vibration, now wanting. All the sound that is formed here is formed, not by thearrestof breath, but by theescapeof it.
I feel that this account of the mechanism of the apparently simple soundp, labours under all the difficultiesthat attend thedescriptionof a sound; and for this reason I again request the reader to satisfy himself either of its truth or of its inaccuracy, before he proceeds to the conclusions that will be drawn from it.
The account, however, being recognized, we have in the sound ofp, two elements:—
1. That formed by the current of air and the closure of the lips, as inap. This may be called the sound of breatharrested.
2. That formed by the current of air, and the opening of the lips, as inpa. This may be called the sound of breathescaping.
Now what may be said ofpmay be said of all the other consonants, the wordstongue,teeth, &c., being used instead oflips, according to the case.
Let the sound of breatharrestedbe expressed byπ, and that of breathescapingbe expressed byϖ, the two together formp(π+ϖ=p).
Thusap(as quoted above) isp-ϖ, orπ; whilstpa(sounded similarly) isp-π, orϖ.
In the formation of syllables, I consider that the sound of breath arrested belongs to the first, and the sound of breath escaping to the second syllable; that if each sound were expressed by a separate sign, the wordhappywould be divided thus,haπ-ϖy; and that such would be the case with all consonants between two syllables. Thewholeconsonant belongs neither to one syllable nor the other. Half of it belongs to each. The reduplication of thepinhappy, thetinpitted, &c., is a mere point of spelling.
ON QUANTITY.
§ 136. The dependent vowels, as theainfat,iinfit,uinbut,oinnot, have the character of being uttered with rapidity, and they pass quickly in the enunciation, the voice not resting on them. This rapidity of utterance becomes more evident when we contrast with them the prolonged sounds of theainfate,eeinfeet,ooinbook, oroinnote; wherein the utterance is retarded, and wherein the voice rests, delays, or is prolonged. Thefandtoffateare separated by a longer interval than thefandtoffat; and the same is the case withfit,feet, &c.
Let thenand thetofnotbe each as 1, theoalso being as 1; then each letter, consonant or vowel, shall constitute ⅓ of the whole word.
Let, however, thenand thetofnotebe each as 1, theobeing as 2. Then, instead of each consonant constituting ⅓ of the whole word, it shall constitute but ¼.
Upon the comparative extent to which the voice is prolonged, the division of vowels and syllables intolongandshorthas been established: theoinnotebeing long, theoinnotbeing short. And the longness or shortness of a vowel or syllable is said to be itsquantity.
§ 137. Attention is directed to the wordvowel. The longness or shortness of avowelis one thing. The longness or shortness of asyllableanother. This difference isimportant in prosody; especially in comparing the English with the classical metres.
The vowel in the syllableseeis long; and long it remains, whether it stand as it is, or be followed by a consonant, as insee-n, or by a vowel, as insee-ing.
The vowel in the wordsitis short. If followed by a vowel it becomes unpronounceable, except as theeainseator theiinsight. By a consonant, however, itmaybe followed. Such is the case in the word quoted—sit. Followed by asecondconsonant, it still retains its shortness,e.g.,sits. Whatever the comparative length of thesyllables,seeandseen,sitandsits, may be, the length of their respectivevowelsis the same.
Now, if we determine the character of the syllable by the character of the vowel, all syllables are short wherein there is a short vowel, and all are long wherein there is a long one. Hence, measured by the quantity of the vowel, the wordsitsis short, and the syllablesee-inseeingis long.
§ 138. But it is well known that this view is not the view commonly taken of the syllablessee(inseeing) andsits. It is well known, that, in the eyes of a classical scholar, thesee(inseeing) is short, and that in the wordsitstheiis long.
The classic differs from the Englishman thus,—He measures his quantity, not by the length of the vowel, but by the length of the syllable taken altogether.The perception of this distinction enables us to comprehend the following statements.
a.That vowels long by nature mayappearto become short by position, andvice versâ.
b.That, by a laxity of language, thevowelmay be said to have changed its quantity, whilst it is thesyllablealone that has been altered.
c.That if one person measures his quantities by the vowels, and another by the syllables, what is short to the one, shall be long to the other, andvice versâ. The same is the case with nations.
d.That one of the most essential differences between the English and the classical languages is that the quantities (as far as they go) of the first are measured by the vowel, those of the latter by the syllable. To a Roman the wordmonumentconsists of two short syllables and one long one; to an Englishman it contains three short syllables.
ON ACCENT.
§ 139. In the wordtyrantthere is an emphasis, or stress, upon the first syllable. In the wordpresumethere is an emphasis, or stress, on the second syllable. This emphasis, or stress, is calledaccent. The circumstance of a syllable bearing an accent is sometimes expressed by a mark (′); in which case the word is said to be accentuated,i.e., to have the accent signified in writing.
Words accented on the last syllable—Brigáde,preténce,harpoón,reliéve,detér,assúme,besóught,beréft,befóre,abroád,abóde,abstrúse,intermíx,superádd,cavaliér.
Words accented on the last syllable but one—An'chor,ar'gue,hásten,fáther,fóxes,smíting,húsband,márket,vápour,bárefoot,archángel,bespátter,disáble,terrífic.
Words accented on the last syllable but two—Reg'ular,an'tidote,for'tify,suscéptible,incontrovértible.
Words accented on the last syllable but three (rare)—Réceptacle,régulating,tálkativeness,ábsolutely,lúminary,inévitable, &c.
§ 140. A great number of words are distinguished by the difference of accent alone.
§ 141. Intýrantandpresúme, we deal with single words; and in eachwordwe determine whichsyllableis accented. Contrasted with the sort of accent that follows, this may be called averbalaccent.
In the line,
Better forus, perhaps, it might appear,—(Pope's "Essay on Man,"I.169.)
Better forus, perhaps, it might appear,—(Pope's "Essay on Man,"I.169.)
Better forus, perhaps, it might appear,—(Pope's "Essay on Man,"I.169.)
the pronounusis strongly brought forward. An especial stress or emphasis is laid upon it, denoting thatthere are other beings to whom it might not appear, &c. This is collected from the context. Here there is alogicalaccent. "When one word in a sentence is distinguished by a stress, as more important than the rest, we may say that it isemphatical, or that anemphasisis laid upon it. When one syllable in a word is distinguished by a stress, and more audible than the rest, we say that it is accented, or that an accent is put upon it. Accent, therefore, is to syllables what emphasis is to sentences; it distinguishes one from the crowd, and brings it forward to observation."—Nares' "Orthoepy," part ii. chap. 1.
ORTHOGRAPHY.
§ 142.Orthoepy, a word derived from the Greekorthon(upright), andepos(a word), signifies the right utterance of words. Orthoepy determines words, and deals with a language as it isspoken;orthographydetermines the correct spelling of words, and deals with a language as it iswritten. This latter term is derived from the Greek wordsorthos(upright), andgraphé, orgrafæ(writing). Orthography is less essential to language than orthoepy; since all languages are spoken, whilst but a few languages are written. Orthography presupposes orthoepy. Orthography addresses itself to the eye, orthoepy to the ear. Orthoepy deals with the articulate sounds that constitute syllables and words; orthography treats of the signs by which such articulate sounds are expressed in writing. Aletteris the sign of an articulate (and, in the case ofh, of an inarticulate) sound.
§ 143. A full and perfect system of orthography consists in two things:—1. The possession of a sufficient and consistent alphabet. 2. The right application of such an alphabet. This position may be illustrated more fully.
§ 144. First, in respect to a sufficient and consistent alphabet—Let there be in a certain language, simple single articulate sounds, to the number of forty, whilst the simple single signs, or letters, expressive of them, amount to no more thanthirty. In this case the alphabetis insufficient. It is not full enough: since ten of the simple single articulate sounds have no corresponding signs whereby they may be expressed. In our own language, the sounds (amongst others) ofthinthin, and ofthinthine, are simple and single, whilst there is no sign equally simple and single to spell them with.
§ 145. An alphabet, however, may be sufficient, and yet imperfect. It may err on the score of inconsistency. Let there be in a given language two simple single sounds, (for instance) thepinpate, and thefinfate. Let these sounds stand in a given relation to each other. Let a given sign, for instance,פ(as is actually the case in Hebrew), stand for thepinpate; and let a second sign be required for thefinfate. Concerning the nature of this latter sign, two views may be taken. One framer of the alphabet, perceiving that the two sounds are mere modifications of each other, may argue that no new sign (or letter) is at all necessary, but that the sound offinfatemay be expressed by a mere modification of the sign (or letter)פ, and may be written thusפּ, or thusפ′ orפ`, &c.; upon the principle that like sounds should be expressed by like signs. The other framer of the alphabet, contemplating the difference between the two sounds, rather than the likeness, may propose, not a mere modification of the signפ, but a letter altogether new, such asf, orφ, &c., upon the principle that sounds of a given degree of dissimilitude should be expressed by signs of a different degree of dissimilitude.
Hitherto the expression of the sounds in point is a matter of convenience only. No question has been raised as to its consistency or inconsistency. This begins under conditions like the following:—Let there be in the language in point the sounds of thetintin,and of thethinthin; which (it may be remembered) are precisely in the same relation to each other as thepinpateand thefinfate. Let each of these sounds have a sign or letter expressive of it. Upon the nature of these signs, or letters, will depend the nature of the sign or letter required for thefinfate. If the letter expressing thethinthinbe a mere modification of the letter expressing thetintin, then must the letter expressive of thefinfatebe a mere modification of the letter expressing thepinpate, andvice versâ. If this be not the case, the alphabet is inconsistent.
In the English alphabet we have (amongst others) the following inconsistency:—The sound of thefinfate, in a certain relation to the sound of thepinpate, is expressed by a totally distinct sign; whereas, the sound of thethinthin(similarly related to thetintin) is expressed by no new sign, but by a mere modification oft; viz.,th.
§ 146. A third element in the faultiness of an alphabet is the fault of erroneous representation. The best illustration of this we get from the Hebrew alphabet, where the sounds ofתandט, merevarietiesof each other, are represented by distinct and dissimilar signs, whilstתandתּ, soundsspecificallydistinct, are expressed by a mere modification of the same sign, or letter.
§ 147.The right application of an alphabet.—An alphabet may be both sufficient and consistent, accurate in its representation of the alliances between articulate sounds, and in no wise redundant; and yet, withal, it may be so wrongly applied as to be defective. Of defect in the use or application of the letters of an alphabet, the three main causes are the following:—
a.Unsteadiness in the power of letters.—Of this there are two kinds. In the first, there is one sound with two (or more) ways of expressing it. Such is the sound ofthe letterfin English. In words of Anglo-Saxon origin it is spelt with a single simple sign, as infill; whilst in Greek words it is denoted by a combination, as inPhilip. The reverse of this takes place with the letterg; here a single sign has a double power; ingibbetit is sounded asj, and ingibberishasgingot.
b.The aim at secondary objects.—The natural aim of orthography, of spelling, or of writing, is to express thesoundsof a language. Syllables and words it takes as they meet the ear, it translates them by appropriate signs, and so paints them, as it were, to the eye. That this is the natural and primary object is self-evident; but beyond this natural and primary object there is, with the orthographical systems of most languages, a secondary one,viz., the attempt to combine with the representation of the sound of a given word, the representation of its history and origin.
The sound of thec, incity, is the sound that we naturally spell with the letters, and if the expression of this sound was theonlyobject of our orthographists, the word would be spelt accordingly (sity). The following facts, however, traverse this simple view of the matter. The word is a derived word; it is transplanted into our own language from the Latin, where it is spelt with ac(civitas); and to change thiscintosconceals the origin and history of the word. For this reason thecis retained, although, as far as the mere expression of sounds (the primary object in orthography) is concerned, the letter is a superfluity. In cases like the one adduced the orthography is bent to a secondary end, and is traversed by the etymology.
c.Obsoleteness.—It is very evident that modes of spelling which at one time may have been correct, may, by a change of pronunciation, become incorrect; so thatorthography becomes obsolete whenever there takes place a change of speech without a correspondent change of spelling.
§ 148. From the foregoing sections we arrive at the theory of a full and perfect alphabet and orthography, of which a few (amongst many others) of the chief conditions are as follow:—
1. That for every simple single sound, incapable of being represented by a combination of letters, there be a simple single sign.
2. That sounds within a determined degree of likeness be represented by signs within a determined degree of likeness; whilst sounds beyond a certain degree of likeness be represented by distinct and different signs,and that uniformly.
3. That no sound have more than one sign to express it.
4. That no sign express more than one sound.
5. That the primary aim of orthography be to express the sounds of words, and not their histories.
6. That changes of speech be followed by corresponding changes of spelling.
With these principles in our mind we may measure the imperfections of our own and of other alphabets.
§ 149. Previous to considering the sufficiency or insufficiency of the English alphabet, it is necessary to enumerate the elementary articulate sounds of the language. The vowels belonging to the English language are the followingtwelve:—
The diphthongal sounds arefour.
This last sound being most incorrectly expressed by the single letteri.
The consonantal sounds are, 1. the two semivowels; 2. the four liquids; 3. fourteen out of the sixteen mutes; 4.chinchest, andjinjest, compound sibilants; 5.ng, as inking; 6. the aspirateh. In all, twenty-four.
§ 150. Some writers would add to these the additional sound of theé ferméof the French; believing that the vowel in words liketheirandveinhas a different sound from the vowel in words likethereandvain. For my own part I cannot detect such a difference either in my own speech or that of my neighbours; although I am far from denying that in certaindialectsof our language such may have been the case. The following is an extract from the "Danish Grammar for Englishmen," by Professor Rask, whose eye, in the matter in question, seems to have misled his ear; "Theé fermé, orclose é, is very frequent in Danish, but scarcely perceptible in English; unless in such words astheir,vein,veil, which appear to sound a little different fromthere,vain,vale."
§ 151. The vowels being twelve, the diphthongs four, and the consonantal sounds twenty-four, we have altogether as many as forty sounds, some being so closely allied to each other as to be mere modifications, and others being combinations rather than simple sounds; all, however, agreeing in requiring to be expressed by letters or by combinations of letters, and to be distinguished from each other. This enables us to appreciate—
§ 152.The insufficiency of the English alphabet.—
a.In respect to the vowels.—Notwithstanding the fact that the sounds of theainfather,fate, andfat, and of theoand theawinnote,not, andbawl, are modifications ofaandorespectively, we have stillsixvowel sounds specifically distinct, for which (ybeing a consonant rather than a vowel) we have butfivesigns. Theuinduck, specifically distinct from theuinbull, has no specifically distinct sign to represent it.
b.In respect to the consonants.—Thethinthin, thethinthine, theshinshine, thezinazure, and thenginking, five sounds specifically distinct, and five sounds perfectly simple require corresponding signs, which they have not.
§ 153.Its inconsistency.—Thefinfan, and thevinvan, sounds in a certain degree of relationship topandb, are expressed by sounds as unlike asfis unlikep, and asvis unlikeb. The sound of thethinthin, thethinthine, theshinshine, similarly related tot,d, ands, are expressed by signs as liket,d, ands, respectively, asthandsh.
The compound sibilant sound ofjinjestis spelt withthe single signj, whilst the compound sibilant sound inchestis spelt with the combinationch.
§ 154.Erroneousness.—The sound of theeeinfeetis considered the long (independent) sound of theeinbed; whereas it is the long (independent) sound of theiinpit.
Theiinbiteis considered as the long (independent) sound of theiinpit; whereas it is a diphthongal sound.
Theuinduckis looked upon as a modification of theuinbull; whereas it is a specifically distinct sound.
Theouinhouseand theoiinoilare looked upon as the compounds ofoandiand ofoandurespectively; whereas the latter element of them is notiandu, butyandw.
Thethinthinand thethinthineare dealt with as one and the same sound; whereas they are sounds specifically distinct.
Thechinchestis dealt with as a modification ofc(either with the power ofkor ofs); whereas its elements aretandsh.
§ 155.Redundancy.—As far as the representation of sounds is concerned the lettercis superfluous. In words likecitizenit may be replaced bys; in words likecatbyk. Inch, as inchest, it has no proper place. Inch, as inmechanical,itmay be replaced byk.
Qis superfluous,cworkwbeing its equivalent.
Xalso is superfluous,ks,gz, orz, being equivalent to it.
The diphthongal formsæandœ, as inÆneasandCrœsus, except in the way of etymology, are superfluous and redundant.
§ 156.Unsteadiness.—Here we have (amongst manyother examples), 1. The consonantcwith the double power ofsandk; 2.gwith its sound ingunand also with its sound ingin; 3.xwith its sounds inAlexander,apoplexy,Xenophon.
In the foregoing examples a single sign has a double power; in the wordsPhilipandfilip, &c.; a single sound has a double sign.
In respect to the degree wherein the English orthography is made subservient to etymology, it is sufficient to repeat the statement that as many as three lettersc,æ, andœare retained in the alphabet foretymological purposes only.
§ 157. The defects noticed in the preceding sections areabsolutedefects, and would exist, as they do at present, were there no language in the world except the English. This is not the case with those that are now about to be noticed; for them, indeed, the worddefectis somewhat too strong a term. They may more properly be termed inconveniences.
Compared with the languages of the rest of the world the use of many letters in the English alphabet issingular. The letteri(when long or independent) is, with the exception of England, generally sounded asee. With Englishmen it has a diphthongal power. The inconvenience of this is the necessity that it imposes upon us, in studying foreign languages, of unlearning the sound which we give it in our own, and of learning the sound which it bears in the language studied. So it is (amongst many others) with the letterj. In English this has the sound ofdzh, in French ofzh, and in German ofy. From singularity in the use of letters arises inconvenience in the study of foreign tongues.
In usingjasdzhthere is a second objection. It is not only inconvenient, but it is theoretically incorrect.The letterjwas originally a modification of the voweli. The Germans, who used it as the semivowely, have perverted it from its original power less than the English have done, who sound itdzh.
With these views we may appreciate in the English alphabet and orthography—
Its convenience or inconvenience in respect to learning foreign tongues.—The sound given to theainfateis singular. Other nations sound it asainfather.
The sound given to thee, long (or independent), is singular. Other nations sound it either asainfate, or asé fermé.
The sound given to theiinbiteis singular. Other nations sound it aseeinfeet.
The sound given to theooinfoolis singular. Other nations sound it as theoinnote, or as theó chiuso.
The sound given to theuinduckis singular. Other nations sound it as theuinbull.
The sound given to theouinhouseis singular. Other nations, more correctly, represent it byauoraw.
The sound given to thewinwetis somewhat singular, but is also correct and convenient. With many nations it is not found at all, whilst with those where it occurs it has the sound (there or thereabouts) ofv.
The sound given toyis somewhat singular. In Danish it has a vowel power. In German the semivowel sound is spelt withj.
The sound given tozis not the sound which it has in German and Italian, but its power in English is convenient and correct.
The sound given tochinchestis singular. In other languages it has generally a guttural sound; in French that ofsh. The English usage is more correct than the French, but less correct than the German.
The sound given toj(as said before) is singular.
§ 158.The historical propriety or impropriety of certain letters.—The use ofiwith a diphthongal power is not only singular and inconvenient, but alsohistorically incorrect. The Greekiota, from whence it originates, has the sound ofiandee, as inpitandfeet.
They, sounded as inyet, is historically incorrect. It grew out of the Greekυ, a vowel, and no semivowel. The Danes still use it as such, that is, with the power of the Germanü.
The use ofjfordzhis historically incorrect.
The use ofcforkin words derived from the Greek asmechanical,ascetic, &c., is historically incorrect. The formcis the representative ofγandσand not of the Greekkappa.
§ 159.On certain conventional modes of spelling.—In the Greek language the sounds ofoinnotand ofoinnote(although allied) are expressed by the unlike signs (or letters)οandω, respectively. In most other languages the difference between the sounds is considered too slight to require for its expression signs so distinct and dissimilar. In some languages the difference is neglected altogether. In many, however, it is expressed, and that by some modification of the original letter.
Let the sign (ˉ) denote that the vowel over which it stands is long, or independent, whilst the sign (˘) indicates shortness, or dependence. In such a case, instead of writingnotandnωt, like the Greeks, we may writenŏtandnōt, the sign serving for a fresh letter. Herein the expression of the nature of the sound is natural, because the natural use of (ˉ) and (˘) is to express length or shortness, dependence or independence. Now, supposing the broad sound ofoto bealready represented, it is very evident that, of the other two sounds ofo, the one must be long (independent), and the other short (dependent); and as it is only necessary to express one of these conditions, we may, if we choose, use the sign (ˉ) alone; its presence denoting length, and its absence shortness (independence or dependence).
As signs of this kind, one mark is as good as another; and instead of (ˉ) we may, if we chose, substitute such a mark as (′) and writenót=nōt=nωt=nōte; provided only that the sign (′) expresses no other condition or affection of a sound. This use of the mark (′), as a sign that the vowel over which it is placed is long (independent), is common in many languages. But is this use of (′) natural? For a reason that the reader has anticipated, it is not natural, but conventional. Neither is it convenient. It is used elsewhere not as the sign ofquantity, but as the sign ofaccent; consequently, being placed over a letter, and being interpreted according to its natural meaning, it gives the idea, not that the syllable is long, but that it is emphatic or accented. Its use as a sign of quantity then, would be an orthographical expedient, or an inconvenient conventional mode of spelling.
The English language abounds in orthographical expedients; the modes of expressing the quantity of the vowels being particularly numerous. To begin with these:—
The reduplication of a vowel where there is but one syllable (as infeet,cool), is an orthographical expedient. It merely means that the syllable is long (or independent).
The juxtaposition of two different vowels, where there is but one syllable (as inplain,moan), is anorthographical expedient. It generally means the same as the reduplication of a vowel,i.e., that the syllable is long (independent).
The addition of theemute, as inplane,whale(whatever may have been its origin), is, at present, but an orthographical expedient. It denotes the lengthening of the syllable.
The reduplication of the consonant after a vowel, as inspotted,torrent, is in most cases but an orthographical expedient. It merely denotes that the preceding vowel is short (dependent).
The use ofphforfinPhilip, is an orthographical expedient, founded upon etymological reasons.
The use ofthfor the simple sound of the first consonant inthinandthine, is an orthographical expedient. The combination must be dealt with as a single letter.
Caution.—Thelettersxandqare not orthographical expedients. They are orthographicalcompendiums,x=ks, andq=kw.
HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE ENGLISH ALPHABET.
§ 160. The preceding chapter has exhibited the theory of a full and perfect alphabet; it has shown how far the English alphabet falls short of such a standard; and, above all, it has exhibited some of the conventional modes of spelling which the insufficiency of alphabets, combined with other causes, has engendered. The present chapter gives ahistoryof our alphabet, whereby many of its defects areaccounted for. These defects, it may be said, once for all, the English alphabet shares with those of the rest of the world; although, with the doubtful exception of the French, it possesses them in a higher degree than any.
With few, if any exceptions,all the modes of writing in the world originate, directly or indirectly, from the Phœnician.
At a certain period the alphabet of Palestine, Phœnicia, and the neighboring languages of the Semitic tribes, consisted oftwenty-twoseparate and distinct letters.
Now the chances are, that, let a language possess as few elementary articulate sounds as possible, an alphabet of onlytwenty-twoletters will be insufficient.
Hence it may safely be asserted, that the original Semitic alphabet wasinsufficientfor even theSemiticlanguages.
§ 161. In this state it was imported into Greece.Now, as it rarely happens that any two languages have precisely the same elementary articulate sounds, so it rarely happens that an alphabet can be transplanted from one tongue to another, and be found to suit. When such is the case, alterations are required. The extent to which these alterations are made at all, or (if made) made on a right principle varies with different languages. Someadaptan introduced alphabet well: others badly.
Of thetwenty-twoPhœnician letters the Greeks took buttwenty-one. The eighteenth letter,tsadiצwas never imported into Europe.
Compared with the Semitic, theOldGreek alphabet ran thus:—
Thenamesof the letters were as follows: