The weekly clarion., 1879-03-05
VOLUME XIII.

= IL L7a'4H' lIatherj, D. C. x % q,
(met), I, (goj, h, /, pick, l, u, L, Q, (go)
P, 7, :, So, t, u, lfullJ.
2. The consonant sounds represented il
Latin by and are now represented by
and V, and the sonants corresponding 70 anc
are now represented by and z.
;. There are three short vowels unknown tc
the early Romans which are without proper
representative in English, those in fat, not
but
4. There are Eve elementary consonanta
represented by digraph5: tn 0thinl, th-dh
thine, them, sh lsheJ, zh (azureJ ng (singj
to which may be added ch church., 2 %.
1t seems best to follow the Latin and other
languages written in Roman letters, in the
use Of a single sign for a short vowel and its
long, distinguishing these, where great exact
ness is required, by diacritical mark.
The alphabet would then have thirty-two
letters. Twenty-Five Of these have their com
mon form and power described in l and 2.
The three vowels in fat not but, need new
letters. For the cousonauts now represented
by diraphz new letters would be desirable" F"
The changes recommended are substantially
these: I-t thirty-two letters instead Of twenty
q b, c. d, Q, f. g n, i, j l, m, n, 0, p, r, fsot:
/ /, u, lfullJ, v, W, y, Z, 3. Three new vowel
/ letters for a. %. "a. 4. That k, q, and x be
dropped. s. That the digraphs now repre-
| senting single consouantg be Tor the present
named and treated a. single letters, viz; tn,
din, sh, zh, ug. ch. g. That and be distin-
/ guised by diacetial marks.
This Is the substance to the new alpha
/ bet proposed; but the committee was continu-
ei another year and in 1873 at Saratoga, it
made the following suggestions as to spelling:
( /. Drop all silent letters, especially silent
/ e after a short vowel in have, give; and a
/ in ca when pronounced short, a. in head
/ health. ?. Write for phi in such words az
/ alphabet philosopher. 3. When word ends
/ in double letter, omit the last, as in shall,
/ cliff. /. Change ed final to where it has the
sound OF [, in laShed, impressed.
! The alphabet recommended above by the
/ Pathological Association was adopted by the
/ Spelling Reform Association in 1877; and the
| the rules for spelling have been since adopted.
The advocates of -pelling-reform argue that
/ l. The alphabet Is redundant, detective and
inconsistent.
/ 2. The spelling hinders our people from be-
coming readers o. by the length Of time it
takes to learn and (2) by the dislike Of read
| ing it induces. An averages German learns,
| they say, in about one-third the time.
| 3. Civilization and Christianity are both
hndered by the difiicultness.
t. Vast annual expense is incurred by print
ing silent letters.
| 5. In most languages changes in written
words rapidly correspond to changes in pro-
| nunciation. Why not in ours?
| 6. The language made for men and not
| men for the language.
| :. This system will make it easiest for all
| 70 read English who reach French, German,
| Latin, Greek or Anglo Saxon.
! 5. 1t viii make the learning OF foreign
! tongues easy
9 1t viii settle the school pronunciation Of
| Latin and Greek.
10 Several modern languages have had their
! spelling reformed by the influence of learned
I academies, or by governments and surely
/ language needs reform more than ours, and
no race are more ready reformers.
! The opponents OF the system represent that:
! /. 1t Is impossible to carry it into effect.
| The people viii not bc persuaded To give up
| their present method.
! > The scheme assumes that all men pro-
| uouuce all words alike; whereas the unedu-
Gated not only spell wrongly, (which may be
| laid to the charge of our perverse system OF
| spelling. but with an ineNhaustible variety OF
error and that too in the case OF simplest
/ words There would therefore be no standard
! for phonetic spelling.
| 3 Many words pronounced alike are spelled
differently: il Is bad enough to have them
! confouuded to the ear, but the case would be
worse if they were undistiuguishable to the
| eve.
! t. The pronunciation Is constantly changing;
/ if change OF spelling Is begun, it viii need to
| be continued indefinitely.
| ,. The scheme. if successfully carried out,
would he destructive OF genealogical studies,
especially in the OF words derived from
! foreign tongues.
Having thus set before YOU the arguments
| OF both sides, it is perhaps but fair to present
| the reioinder of the advocates of change. To
| the first objection they oppose their last state
ment, viz several languages have had their
| spelling changed and therefore il Is not impos-
! sibe. To the second they reply that while
men differ in pronunciation we have been able
| to maintain a standard of most difficult spell
| ing; it would be quite as feasible to maintain
one OF easy spelling To the third they say if
| speaking words pronounced alike produces no
| confusion to the ear, when one must hurry
| with the speaker. spelling alike words pro-
| uounced alike viii be less likely to produce
| confusion to the eye especially the writer
| can be As leisurcly he wishes. To the
! fourth they answer, this IS SO in most langua-
ges To the fifth and last they reply "A
| changeless othographv destroys the material
! for chronological study, and written records
valuable to the philologist just in proportion
As they accurate records OF speech as
| spoken from wear to year. Prof Hadley
| says: Our common spelling Is often
| an untrustworthy guide to etymology;"
| and Max Muller atfrms that III our spelling
/ followed the pronunciation OF words, II would
| in reality be OF greater help TO the critical
| student of language than the present uncer-
| tain and unscientihC mode of writing The
[ foremost Ar,rip-SINpn scholar pf this
| saws: Comparative philology Is founded on
| phonetics, and scholar work in this
| field without lamenting the condition of the
| English language.
Before closing this report it has been thought
well to call attention to the proportions which
the spelling-reform movement has assumed.
| The popular mind seems awake, never
before, 10 the appreciation OF the difficulties,
| eccentricities and absurdities OF the present
standard English The foremost scholars in
| English, OF this country and OF the mother
| country, are coming TO agreement on this sub
| iect as they have never done before Among
| it, friends in England may be mentioned 4. J.
| Ellis, author OF the great work on Early En-
| glsh Pronunciation; Max Muller, the most
| popular phiologist of the day; DR.. j. A. ii.
| Murray, President Of the London Pathological
| Association. and author Of the Dialects of the
Southern Counties OF Scotland; DR.. Richard
| Morris, whose work on English Accidence"
has been a textbook in this institution for the
| last six years; and many others scarcely less
noted workers in the field of English philology.
| Among the officers for 1S7S-79 OF the Spelling
Reform Association are three former Pres
idents of the London Pathological Society, and
| three of the American Pathological Asso-
ciation The truth Is, the Spelling Reform As
sociation is in a large sense the child of the
American Pathological Association, which is
the largest and most influential literary society
| in this country 1t numbers among Its men,
bers representatives of more than one hundred
educational institutions of the United States,