The Potter journal. [volume] (Coudersport, Pa.) 1857-1872, 1859-02-24
Communications.
Tor lie IOieT J0ltT1l0I.
Letters On PhOncticS. No. S.
ObjcrHoHS.

Objections.
Any ne~ theory which is advanced, and
Improvements suggested, have always met
with uiure or less objections, and many Of
the objections have as often been more
tanciad than real. Phoaetics Is not ez-
rmpt from objections, which have been
very urgently pressed.
The first objection which IS generally
raised By the learned ones, is thectynl0lo-
gi;cal objection Ben Franklin has ans
,yered this objection fully and 50 clearly
that we will copy his own remarks: " Ety-
.nologies" says he care at present very
uncertain; bat such as they are the old
books would still preserve them, and ETY.
noog;.ts would there find them. Words
in the course of time, change their atean-
mas as well Us their Spel.lugs and prOnun-
Citations, aud we do not look to etymology
for their present meanings. II l should
call man knave and villain, he would
hardly be satisfied with my telling him
that one of the words originaliy signifed
only lad or servant, and the other a
plowman, or the inhabitant Of village.
If etymo!ogy is SO important and the
present spelling so necessary for studying
i, why is 1t thar the mere Latin aud Greek
scholar is unable, from the photography Of
,he words in the Lords Prayer, to tell the
history, derivation and meaning Of more
than two or three, as treSpaSses, teo2p'"-
ton, deiiuer, giory, and even here Will be
most probably in error, az he may be IN
clincd to give to the Latin what belongs
10 tae French.
Does not this show that the spelling
atone does nor give the required iniornla-
ton, but only the spelling with much
Other iedruiRg?
The study of etymology is deep study,
and requires laborious and patient inVes-
tigation to become masters oflt-and one
of the greatest etymologistS now living,
said a short time since that he should
study it but little in the future, as his
time could be spent better, and his ener-
gies directed in more important channel.
But we will allow, for the sake Of the
argument, that phonetic spelling does to-
taay destroy etymology. How many OF
the human family would be deprived OF
the questionable blessing? 1t is la
Inentable fact that very large number
of persons of these United States cannot
read.
And a very large number also are very
poor readers. The loss of etymology 10
these two classes would be nothing, but
the acquisition of phonetics would be an
inestimable gain.
Then, a large proportion Of those who
Justly claim to be learned or literally cd
ucated, know nothing comparatively Of this
ctymology,-at least they make but little
use of their knowledge for, when called
upon to give the etymoogy or derivation
of a word, they cannot do it without re
ferring to a Dictionary, which any oHl
can do who can read.
We see the number who would be af
fected by loss of etymology would bt
very small indeed. Then here comes The
important question. Is it right, in orde
10 accommodate a Uo1Wtcsc, to lncommod'
and keep in ignorance the mass? The
philanthropist would say no but adop
the motto, "The greatest good for tAt
greatest number No one, from til,
spelling alone, can trace the slightest re
semblance between an English, French
Latin, Greek, Sanscr;t, Zend, Or Hcbrev
word. The difference Of alphabet edcctu
ally conceaIs this connection EtymoIo
gy deals with words themselves and no
their accidental orthographies.
1t is only the half-learned, then, or tn
half-learned on this paint, who fear any in
jury to etymoIogy, from the adoption 0
phonetic spelling, which on the contrary
will be found one OF the most fayora5l
circumstances which could ensue, to tn
study of true comparative phiIology. s
we see the genealogical objection is Il
objection at all PHo&o.
For the Potter Journal.