New-York tribune., 1901-08-26
FOR SPELLING Reform.
SUGGESTION THAT SCHOLARS SHOULD
BEGIN, WITHOUT WAITING FOR
THE MULTITUDE.

To the Editor of The Tribune.
Sir: noticed not long since an editorial IN The
Tribune commenting somewhat critically on the ac-
ton of the Pathological Association in reference to
spelling reform. For my part, think 1t well
that the subject continues agtated 1t is true
that we have not yet any important result
from the attempts of scholars and philologists in
this direction but that may be because the ef-
fort has been conducted the right lines but is
rather confined to process OF trimming and hedg-
ing the outside of the subject. Now, 1t seems
TO me that the natural way and the easiest way
and the most promising way to effect the proposed
reform is TO begin at the beginning.
BS this rule the thing TO be done first would be
TO correct the OF the three leading vowel
characters so as to make them sound according to
their most prevalent force. It is difficult to see
what intelligent objection any could have to
that. The letter "a" in language sounds "ah"
much more frequently than "ay." In fact II al
most sounds lay" except where IT is final
in syllable not final. unless II is artifcialy as
sisted Why not call IL "ah,' then, all other
peoples do and have done since the invention Of
the alphabet? The case Is the with the letter
"e." and especially with e. use, abuse. OF
which is perhaps the worst perverson OF all. The
place 10 begin. then, is with the schoolmaster and
the spelling book. and in other way probably
any reform be effected worth the trouble in
volved in the process.
There could be no opposition TO this step far
as can see except in an unreasoning and perverse
adherence to stupid custom-the force OF habit
set in wrong direction And when this correction
IS once made. would before long begin 20 find
out that It is not necessary to bolster up these
letters artihcially In a great variety OF different
ways in order 10 make them take a sound which
does not properly belong to them, but would begin
10 the right character with the right sound. in
stead: and thus a true reform would begin grad
ually TO work its way.
There is much 70 be said l think. IN favor OF a
gradual and partial return 10 phonetic spelling
though cannot say that I approve of the proposed
examples OF change IN this direction which have
come under my observation. Phonetic spelling was
undoubtedly the original design In reducing spoken
language 10 alphabetic form. and deviations from
II were doubtless originally but mistakes and
ounders. They were bunders. however from
which we ought not always 70 he obliged 10 suffer
AS II is, many Of our combinations have simply tho
force and OF word signs, more awkward and
difficult. probably. than any used by the Chinese
I-h-o-u-g-h-t' docs not spell thought. and no.
Dooy can ever imagine that II does and as a
word sign II is more inconvenient and awkward
than 81 for three or ''S' for eight Scholars and
philologists do not need have the origin and his
tory of word constantly and forever written into
II at the expense Of its spelling and those who are
not scholars cannot read the history IL Il Is there
Nor do l conceive that there Is really n dlrrcultv
IN having the same sound and the same word rep
resent different ideas without difference OF smelling
10 distinguish them. The connection shows the
meaning sufhclentIy. else the spoken language
"ioH - the real thing and not It's representatives
could not be properly understood. If we sneak or
write OF the reign OF Edward VII no one will I'm,
@snS s Ihat we mean drops OF water falling from
~ iouus' or one or the lines with which he guides
ms Morse And there hundreds Of ca ses In ot,r
language and in all others in which the same word
Mtsh precisely me same spelling. signifies widely
cnerent derivative ideas. TO be distnguished o1Iy
by the connection. ''
II is true, as The Tribune remarks that a gradual
fnT g ana "a, Improvement is going in the
ana cannot begin keep pace with the rand
spread OF the language over the earth II is a
th tneFelofe IN which ought not TO adopt
inhict on other peoples the ov. under which the
a1HsSh - speaking races are sufrering-namely that
people can never hope TO reduce to correct written
them All anu nut uat1r wnich probably nne-tenths of
crate. ~ '' '' " seem 'i'''-
should be trying to erect o0 10 m me @ thst
llsh scholarship the blunders OF an intensely ig-
saxon French and Scandinavian elements ~ tbe
Ianguago through a childish inability lost and
N0Weis mus iaying the foundation for most OF our
20 nose who a.e SO persistent in urging
say that some correction OF pronunciation which
would make many words in common use sound
more according 10 the true force OF their vowes
would be greatly to their advantage They can
make the desired corrections themselves without
any dependence on dictionary. publisher or press
question should be pronounced, and begin ut once
TO pronounce them in that way. There are enough
Of these men, and their authority as scholars is
con1ers spd az rah hold their ground against all
extensive and gradually prevailing use in spite of
,Nhat ground Of criticism could there be II we
should pronounce 'nashon" and 'nashonal"
,po Ooay and ana aobaydient' without any change from
the conventional spelling? For my own part I
si1 am convinced that no satisfactory reform in Eng
measure of corrected pronunciation as would bring
nearer 10 the line OF historic and linguistic con-
kindred tongues shall accompany or precede it.
Waterbury, Conn. Aug "a. d. G. PORTER.