The weekly Butte record., 1861-11-09
Orthography of Our Language.

VI01S5Adplty VI SeA @-tSAfs Asi
The orthography of the English language is
certainly detective and might be gradually
remeded.
Nearly, if not quite half the words contain
too many letters, and these are put together in
such an awkward manner that we are obliged
to spell from memory instead of rules. We
have rules, but what are they good for? Who
remembers them, or if they are remembered,
who is governed by them?
There are so many exceptions to the rules
that the mind becomes confused 10 their appi
cation, and there is no other way than TO fall
back op the memory, think how the word ap-
pears to the eye as it is seen in print, and
spell it accordingly. If the appearance Of the
word cannot be recolleced, the next thing is
to fad the word in the dictionary, and then
see how the letters stand to each other. This
need not be so if the rules of our orihography
were more simple and natural. Every letter
in the alphabet is supposed to possess the pow
er of a certain sound, some of the letters seve-
ra! sounds, and if placed beside certain other
letters these sounds vary, and by the bungliug
customs from which we have never yet risen,
perplexity and confusion is produced. Abso-
solate perfection may not be looked for, but
when when we see this department Of learning
full of absurdities, may we not look for i'm
proyements?
On opening any book we shall End few lines
but what give proof that there should be a
change in our mode of spelling
Why do we need ph to produce the sound
we give to +, when f would do as well OF
what use is ! ia scould, could. and should
Why not put in r, q, and :, and then call
them silent letters Is OF any use use in
doubt, or 0 in double? Yet we must put them
in because it is custom. So it is all through
the wide range OF the English language.
The tedious, clumsy manner of spelling in
our language has led to the formation of q
system Of photography, by which only such
letters are placed in word as are necessary
to produce the desired sound. 1t is true that
this system is usually written with characters
different from ours, but the philosophy Of the
system might be used with our letters.
IF our photographers and publishers were to
form the shortest possible method, and it be
introduced in the schools throughout the coun-
try, the children would very easily learn the
system, ana others, dropping the many useless
letters which the standard compels them now
to crowd into the words would be relieved by
adopting and learning it too
1t took long time to clear the letter II out
of color; but it was done finally, and so with
a few other words, while the improvement
should have extended to thousand.
Improvements are being carried forward in
agriculture. navigation, etc, while here we are
a hundred years behind the times, dragging
out phthiSic, and then calling it tisjc. We
write through, while thru would be shorter and
more natural.
photographers are obliged to spell many
common words for US, and this they do on the
principle Of photography, or of common sense
thus: league, leeg." Why not write it
leeg at once, and have it considered properly
written Then it would be right.
We should be glad to see a reformation
commenced and carried on in this department
Of learring-a change made in the orthogra-
ply of our language, at once clear and philo-
sophical, easier for children and foreigners to
learn, ard more easy for all to write.-Ladies'
Repository.