which has thus been produced consists of thirty-eight characters, which are arranged below according to Mr. Pitman's distribution. The quotations which are given in illustration are taken from the Phonetic Journal, 1862 and 1864.

THE PHONETIC ALPHABET.

188. SPECIMEN OF PHONETIC PRINTING,

"Wi kanot tel az yet whot | "We cannot tell as yet what langwej iz. It me bi a pro-language is. It may be a prodskfon ov netur, a work ov duction of nature, a work of human art, or a Divin gift. human art, or a Divine gift. Bet tu whotever sfir it belonz, But to whatever sphere it belongs, it wud sim tu stand snsor- it would seem to stand unsurpast-ne snikwald in it-bį passed-nay unequalled in it-by enitin els. anything else.

66

de sjens ov laŋgwej iz a The science of language is a sjens ov veri modern det. Wi science of very modern date. We kanot tres its liniej moc be- cannot trace its lineage much beyond de beginin ov our sen-yond the beginning of our centuri, and it iz skersli resivd az tury, and it is scarcely received as yet on a futin ov ikwoliti bi yet on a footing of equality by de elder brancez ov lernin. the elder branches of learning. Its veri nem iz stil onseteld, Its very name is still unsettled, and de veriss titelz dat hav and the various titles that have bin given tu it in Ingland, been given to it in England, Frans, and Jermani, ar se France, and Germany, are so veg and veriin dat de hav vague and varying that they have leď tu de mest konfuzd įdiaz led to the most confused ideas amon de psblik at larj az tu among the public at large as to de rial objekts ov dis nu si- the real objects of this new sciens. Wi hir it spoken ov az ence. We hear it spoken of as Komparativ Filoloji, Sjentifik Comparative Philology, Scientific Etimoloji, Fenoloji, and Glos- Etymology, Phonology, and Glosoloji. In Frans it haz resivd sology. In France it has received de konvinient, bst somwhot the convenient, but somewhat barbaros nem ov Lengistik. barbarous name of Linguistique. miself prefer de simpel desig- I myself prefer the simple designefon ov de Sjens ov Langwej, nation of the Science of Language, do in diz dez OV hi though in these days of high-soundin titelz, dis plen nem -sounding titles, this plain name wil hardli mit wid jeneral will hardly meet with general akseptans."- Maks Muler'z acceptance." Max Müller's Lekturz on de Sjens ov Lay- Lectures on the Science of Langwej, (Ferst Siriz,) 1861. guage, (First Series,) 1861.

66

E fil konvinst ov de truf and rizonabelnes ov de prin

"I feel convinced of the truth and reasonableness of the prin

sipelz on whig de Fonetik ciples on which the Phonetic

and Reform rests,

Reform rests, and đơ Mr Pitman me not liv though Mr Pitman may not live

tu si de rezolts ov hiz perse- to see the results of his persevirin and disinterested ekzer-vering and disinterested exerfonz, it rekwirz no profetik tions, it requires no prophetic pouer to persiv dat whot at power to perceive that what at prezent iz pu-puud bi de present is pooh-poohed by the meni, wil mek its we in de many, will make its way in the end, unles met bį arguments end, unless met by arguments stronger dan dez hidertu lev- stronger than those hitherto leveld at de Fonetik Nuz. Won elled at the Fonetic Nuz. One argument whig mit bi ssp-argument which might be supozd tu we wid de student ov posed to weigh with the student of langwej, nemli, de obskurefon language, namely, the obscuration ov de etimolojikal strøktur ov of the etymological structure of wordz, į kanot konsider veri words, I cannot consider very formidabel. de prensnsiefon formidable. The pronunciation ov langwejez genjez akordin of languages changes according tu fikst loz, de spelin iz to fixed laws, the spelling is genjd in de most arbitrari changed in the most arbitrary maner, so dat if our spelig manner, so that if our spelling folod de prensnsiefon ov followed the pronunciation of wordz, it wud in rialiti bi a words, it would in reality be a greter help tu de kritikal stu- greater help to the critical student ov langwej dan de prezent dent of language than the present snserten and snsjentifik merd uncertain and unscientific mode ov ritin."-Maks Muler'z Lek- of writing.”—Max Müller's Lecturz on de Siens ov Langwej, tures on the Science of Language, (Sekond Siriz,) 1863. (Second Series,) 1863.

To offer an estimate of the merits of this phonetic alphabet would be out of place here. It puts forward a claim to supersede that now in use by right of superior and universal fitness. This claim seems likely to be tested by a variety of practical experiments; for example, it has been used for printing three of the Gospels, Genesis, the Psalms, and the Acts in the Mikmak language, that of the natives of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, under the direction of the Bible Society. The friends and promoters of this alphabet say that it is soon caught by savages abroad and by children at home; and that for the education of our own people it provides the quickest and best means of learning to read the ordinary print. All this will have to be established by a slow probation; and the supporters of the system seem resolved to sustain the trial. Meanwhile, I will point out an

advantage which this phonetic alphabet offers to the young philologer. He would find it a profitable exercise to master this alphabet and transliterate passages of English into it. The gain would be that he would thereby acquire consciousness of the elementary sounds which go to make up English words. If the want of this acquirement is not much felt by English philologers, it is because they are unaware how great a defect it is and how seriously it impedes their researches.

189. But there are schemes before the public which aim at a less radical change, and advocate only a certain measure of reform. They do not aspire to absolute phonetic perfection, and yet they have a standard of their own, which may be described as Consistent spelling. The distinction in itself is just, and it may be exemplified in the French language. Of the three languages we may say that the German is (comparatively speaking) phonetic, and the French consistent; while the English is neither the one nor the other.

The reformers of whom we are about to speak content themselves with the endeavour to bring English spelling nearer to a state of consistency with itself. Such is the purpose of the system projected by Mr. Edward Jones, of Liverpool. He would correct our orthography by using the present letters of the alphabet more consistently, without adding new characters; and by reverting, in certain cases, to the simpler spelling of standard old authors. This proposal is advocated on the ground of the small amount of change which it would necessitate.

190. The following are said to be all the words beginning with A that would have to be changed :

Upon this system, which Mr. Jones calls the Analogic,' and which is particularly recommended for its educational usefulness, Mr. Ellis has commented vigorously. He sees no gain or beauty in it, and he denies its consistency. The memory is not relieved of its grievance, and the whole plan is aimless. In like terms he would speak of all attempts to alter our orthography partially. If a change is to be made at all, it must be by a restoration of the old phonetic principle which (he thinks) reigned paramount till it perished in the Wars of the Roses.

191. The third and last scheme to be mentioned is one that endeavours to conciliate opposite interests. Mr. Danby P. Fry has proposed a plan for the improvement of English orthography, which is to avoid all breach of continuity whether as regards the forms and powers of the characters, or as respects the etymology. The only case in which he confers a new power on a character, or modifies its form, is in the letter v. He would have a v vowel, to represent the vowel in full, bull, and to be distinguished by a slight peculiarity of form. With this addition the twenty-six simple letters would become twenty-seven. For the rest he proceeds on the principle of codifying the actual practice, and he would therefore recognise the consonantal digraphs ch, gh,