PART III. ORTHOGRAPHICAL FORMS IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE. CHAPTER I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF ORTHOGRAPHY. $105. ORTHOGRAPHY is a term derived from the Greek words op0óc (upright) and ypapń (writing). 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. A Letter is the sign of an Articulate Sound. The Letters of the Alphabet are the Elements of the Written language employed to express the elements of the Spoken language. THEORY OF A FULL AND PERFECT ALPHABET AND ORTHOGRAPHY. § 106. For a Theory of a full and perfect Alphabet and Orthography, the chief conditions are as follows: 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 determinate degree of likeness be represented by Signs within a determinate degree of likeness; while 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 4. That no Sign express more than one sound. 5. That the primary aim of Orthography be to express Sounds of Words, and not their histories. it. the 6. That changes in Speech be followed by corresponding changes in spelling. § 107. With these principles in mind, we are prepared to understand the imperfections of our own and other Alphabets. The number of Elementary Sounds in the English language, as exhibited in § 61, is thirty-four, and that of compound sounds is six. To express these sounds there are twenty-six letters of the ALPHABET, which are thus arranged: CHAPTER II. THE DEFECTS OF THE ENGLISH ALPHABET ARE, § 108. I. ITS INSUFFICIENCY.-1. In respect to the Vowels. Notwithstanding the fact that the sounds of a in father, fate, and fat, and of the o and the aw in note, not, and bawl, are modifications of a and o respectively, we have still Six Vowel Sounds specifically distinct, for which (y being as much a consonant as a vowel) we have but five signs. The u in duck, specifically distinct from u in bull, has no specifically distinct sign. 2. In respect to the Consonants. The th in thin, the th in thine, the sh in shine, the z in azure, and the ng in king, five sounds specifically distinct, and five sounds perfectly simple, require corresponding signs, which they have not. II. ITS INCONSISTENCY.-The ƒ in fan, and the v in van, sounds in a certain degree of relationship to p and b, are expressed by signs as unlike as ƒ is unlike p, and as v is unlike b. The sounds of th in thin, and of sh in shine, similarly related to t, d, and s, are expressed by signs as like t and s, respectively, as th and sh. The compound sibilant sound of j in jest is spelled with the simple sign j, while the compound sibilant sound in chest is spelled with the combination ch. III. ITS ERRONEOUSNESS.-The sound of the ee in feet is considered the Long (Independent) sound of the e in bed; whereas it is the Long (Independent) sound of the i in pit. The i in bite is considered as the Long (Independent) sound of the i in pit; whereas it is a diphthongal sound. The u in duck is looked upon as a modification of the u in bull; whereas it is a specifically distinct sound. The ou in house and the oi in oil are looked upon as the compounds of o and i, and of o and u respectively; whereas the latter element of them is not i and u, but y and w. The th in thin and the th in thine are dealt with as one and the same sound; whereas they are sounds specifically distinct. The ch in chest is dealt with as a modification of c (either with the power of k or of s); whereas its elements are t and sh. IV. ITS REDUNDANCY.-As far as the representation of sounds is concerned, the letter c is superfluous. In words like citizen, it may be replaced by s; in words like cat, by k. In ch, as in chest, it has no proper place. In ch, as in mechanical, it may be replaced by k. X is superfluous, ks, gz, or z, being its equivalents. Q is superfluous, cw or kw being its equivalent. The diphthongal forms a and œ, as in Eneas and Cræsus, except in the way of Etymology, are superfluous and redundant. V. ITS UNSTEADINESS.-Here we have (among many other examples), 1. The consonant c with the double power of s and k; 2. g with its sound in gun, and also with its sound as in gin; 3. x, with its sounds in Alexander, apoplexy, Xenophon. In the foregoing examples a single sign has a double power; in the words Philip and fillip a single sound has a double sign. In respect to the degree wherein the English Orthography is made subject to Etymology, it is sufficient to repeat the statement that the c, a, and œ are retained in the alphabet for etymological purposes only. § 109. The Defects noticed in the preceding sections are absolute defects, and would exist as they do at present were there no language in the world but the English. This is not the case with those about to be noticed; for them, indeed, the word defect is somewhat too strong a term. They may be more properly termed inconveniences. Compared with other languages, the use of many letters in the English Alphabet is singular. The letter i (when Long or Independent) is generally sounded as ee. With English men it has a diphthongal power. The inconvenience of this is the necessity 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 (among many others) with the letter j. In English, this has the sound of dzh; in French, of zh; and in German, of y. From singularity in the use of letters arises inconvenience in the study of foreign tongues. In using j as dzh, there is a second objection. It is not only inconvenient, but it is theoretically incorrect. The letter j was originally a modification of the Vowel i. The Germans, who use it as the Semi-vowel y, have perverted it from its orig. inal power less than the English have done, who sound it dzh. With these views we may appreciate certain points of the English Alphabet and Orthography. I. Its Convenience or Inconvenience in respect to learning Foreign Tongues.-The sound given to a in fate is singular. Other nations sound it as a in father. The sound given to Other nations sound ee in feet. Other naThe sound the e Long (or Independent) is singular. it either as a in fate, or as é fermé. The sound given to the 2 in bite is singular. Other nations sound it as The sound given to the oo in foot is singular. tions sound it as the o in note, or as the 6 chiuso. given to the u in duck is singular. Other nations sound it as the u in bull. The sound given to the ou in house is singular. Other nations, more correctly, represent it by au or aw. The sound given to the w in wet is somewhat singular, but is also correct and convenient. With many nations it is not found at all, while with those where it occurs it has the sound (there or thereabouts) of v. The sound given to y is somewhat singular. In Danish it has a Vowel power. The sound given to z is not the sound which it has in German and Italian; but its power in English is convenient and correct. The sound given to ch in chest is singular. In other languages it generally has a guttural sound; in French, that of sh. The English usage is more correct than the French, but less correct than the German. The sound given to j (as said before) is singular. II. The Historical Propriety of certain Letters.-The use of i with a diphthongal is not only singular and inconvenient, but also historically incorrect. The Greek Iota, from whence it originates, has the sound of i and ee, as in pit and feet. The y, sounded as in yet, is historically incorrect. It grew out of the Greek v, a Vowel, and no Semi-vowel. The Danes still use it as such, that is, with the power of the German ü. The use of j as dzh is historically incorrect. The use of c for k, in words derived from the Greek, as, mechanical, ascetic, &c., is historically incorrect. In remodeling alphabets the question of historical propriety should be recognized. Other reasons for the use of a particular letter in a particular |