Part 16 (1/2)

OBS 3--In their definitions of vowels and consonants, rammarians have resolved letters into _sounds only_; as, ”A Vowel is an articulate _sound_,” &c--”A Consonant is an articulate _sound_,” &c--_L Murray's Grans with the things which they signify, is very far fro a true account of either

Besides, letters combined are capable of a certain h speech, doubtless, is what they properly represent In practice, almost all the letters may occasionally happen to be _silent_; yet are they not, in these cases, necessarily useless The deaf and dumb also, to whoht to read and write understandingly They even learn in souish the accented from the unaccented syllables, and to have so else equivalent to it; for so to the rules of prosody Hence it would appear, that the powers of the letters are not, of necessity, identified with their sounds; the things being in soh the terms are commonly taken as synonymous The fact is, that a word, whether spoken or written, is of itself _significant_, whether its corresponding form be known or not

Hence, in the one forible to the illiterate, and in the other, to the educated deaf and dumb; while, to the learned who hear and speak, either for coe of letters rises no higher than to the forms used by the ancient Hebrews and Phoenicians Moses is supposed to have written in characters which were nearly the sas have coular, called the Chaldee or Chaldaic, which is said to have been made by Ezra the scribe, when he wrote out a new copy of the law, after the rebuilding of the temple Cadmus carried the Phoenician alphabet into Greece, where it was subsequently altered and enlarged The small letters were not invented till about the seventh century of our era The Latins, or Romans, derived most of their capitals from the Greeks; but their s thees, and received very great improvements, before it became that beautiful series of characters whichuse, under the name of _Roman letters_ Indeed these particular forms, which are now justly preferred by many nations, are said to have been adopted after the invention of printing ”The Roman letters were first used by Sweynheim and Pannartz, printers who settled at Rome, in 1467 The earliest work printed wholly in this character in England, is said to have been Lily's or Paul's Accidence, printed by Richard Pinson, 1518 The Italic letters were invented by Aldus Manutius at Rome, towards the close of the fifteenth century, and were first used in an edition of Virgil, in 1501”--_Constables Miscellany_, Vol xx, p 147 The Saxon alphabet was mostly Roman Not more than one quarter of the letters have other fore a very different appearance Under William the Conqueror, this alphabet was superseded by the lish, or Black letter; which, in its turn, happily gave place to the present Rolish, but not so heavy

OBS 5--I have suggested that a true knowledge of the letters implies an acquaintance with their _names_, their _classes_, their _powers_, and their _forms_ Under these four heads, therefore, I shall briefly present what seems most worthy of the learner's attention at first, and shall reserve for the appendix a more particular account of these is are not those about which we are in general most inquisitive Hence many, who think themselves sufficiently acquainted with the letters, do in fact know but very little about them If a person is able to read some easy book, he is apt to suppose he has no lects the minute study of these elements, because he sees ords they s lish, is a very small qualification for him who aspires to scholarshi+p, and especially for a _teacher_ For oneable to name the letters properly, or to pronounce such syllables as _ca, ce, ci, co, cu, cy_, without getting half of the No one can ever teach an art lect the _elerammar, our attainments must needs be proportionately unsettled and superficial

I NAMES OF THE LETTERS The _nalish, are _A, Bee, Cee, Dee, E, Eff, Gee, Aitch, I, Jay, Kay, Ell, Em, En, O, Pee, Kue, Ar, Ess, Tee, U, Vee, Double-u, Ex, Wy, Zee_

OBSERVATIONS

OBS 1--With the learning and application of these nains; with a continual rehearsal of the time carried on; nor can we ever dispense with the to s thus named What is obviously indispensable, needs no proof of its importance But I know not whether it has ever been noticed, that these names, like those of the days of the week, are worthy of particular distinction, for their own nature They are words of a very peculiar kind, being nouns that are at once _both proper and con, each letter is a thing strictly individual and identical--that is, it is ever one and the same; yet, in an other respect, it is a co individuals both various and numberless Thus every B is a _b_,else than that sah you make it in a thousand different fashi+ons, and multiply it after each pattern innumerably Here, then, we see individuality coreat diversity, and infinite multiplicity; and it is _to this combination_, that letters owe their wonderful power of transht Their _names_, therefore, should always be written with capitals, as proper nouns, at least in the singular nuularly, as ordinary appellatives

Thus: (if we adopt the nalish schools:) _A, Aes; Bee, Bees; Cee, Cees; Dee, Dees; E, Ees; Eff, Effs; Gee, Gees; Aitch, Aitches; I, Ies; Jay, Jays; Kay, Kays; Ell, Ells; Em, Ems; En, Ens; O, Oes; Pee, Pees; Kue, Kues; Ar, Ars; Ess, Esses; Tee, Tees; U, Ues; Vee, Vees; Double-u, Double-ues; Ex, Exes; Wy, Wies; Zee, Zees_

OBS 2--The naes, are mostly framed _with reference_ to their powers, or sounds Yet is there in English no letter of which the name is always identical with its power: for _A, E, I, O_, and _U_, are the only letters which can name themselves, and all these have other sounds than those which their names express The simple powers of the other letters are so manifestly insufficient to form any name, and so palpable is the difference between the nature and the name of each, that did we not kno education has been trifled with, it would be hard to believe even Murray, when he says, ”They are frequently confounded by writers on gras on the _name_, are often applied to explain the _nature_ of a consonant; and by this means the student is led into error and perplexity”--_L Murray's Gras for which they stand, ireat carelessness in the use of speech, and great indistinctness of apprehension in respect to things; yet so common is this error, that Murray himself has many tiuard, rerammar, both in its study and in its practice, requires the constant exercise of a rational discernment Those letters which name themselves, take for their names those sounds which they usually represent at the end of an accented syllable; thus the naiven to the same letters in the first syllables of the other names, _Abel, Enoch, Isaac, Obed, Urim_; or in the first syllables of the common words, _paper, penal, pilot, potent, pupil_ The other letters, most of which can never be perfectly sounded alone, have names in which their powers are combined with other sounds more vocal; as, _Bee, Cee, Dee,--Ell, Em, En,--Jay, Kay, Kue_ But in this respect the terular; because they have no obvious reference to the powers of the letters thus nas, must be learned and spoken of _by their names_; nor can they be spoken of otherwise; yet, as the simple characters are better known and more easily exhibited than their written names, the former are often substituted for the latter, and are read as the words for which they are assuraphy of these words has hitherto been left too e oversight or negligence, do not recognize theeneral spelled they What they are, or ought to be, has therefore been treated as a trifling question: and, what is still -books make no mention at all of them; while others, here at the very threshold of instruction, teach falsely--giving ”_he_” for _Aitch_, ”_er_” for _Ar_, ”_oo_” or ”_uu_” for _Double-u_, ”_ye_” for _Wy_, and writing almost all the rest improperly So that reatly puzzled to na Nay, there can be found a hundred men who can readily write the alphabetic nao in Greece or Palestine, for one who can do the sa those whichelish:[88] and yet the words themselves are as familiar to every school-boy's lips as are the characters to his eye This fact e has never yet been sufficiently taught A all the particulars which constitute this subject, there are none which better deserve to be everywhere known, by proper and detere

OBS 4--Should it happen to be asked a hundred lustruustan age of English literature,” or in the days of William the Fourth and Andrew Jackson, I fear the learned of that day will be as e tutors noere they asked, by what series of naht not Quintilian or Varro have obligedthese? As it is, we are indebted to Priscian, a grammarian of the sixth century, for almost all we know about them But even the inforely overlooked by our coreater care of earlier writers, has made the Greek names better known or more important than the Latin? In every nation that is not totally illiterate, custom must have established for the letters a certain set of names, which are _the only true ones_, and which are of course to be preferred to such as are local or unauthorized In this, however, as in other things, use may sometimes vary, and possibly improve; but when its decisions are clear, no feeble reason should be allowed to disturb them Every parent, therefore, ould have his children instructed to read and write the English language, should see that in the first place they learn to nalish A Scotch gentleood education informs me, that the names of the letters, as he first learned them in a school in his own country, were these: ”A, Ib, Ec, Id, E, Iff, Ig, Ich, I, Ij, Ik, Ill, Im, In, O, Ip, Kue, Ir, Iss, It, U, Iv, Double-u, Ix, Wy, Iz;”

but that in the salish names are now used It is to be hoped, that all teachers will in tie, and naht to be nalish _orthography_ of these terht a disgrace, and the er at liberty to alter names that are a thousand times better known than their own

OBS 5--It is not in respect to their _orthography_ alone, that these first words in literature demand inquiry and reflection: the _pronunciation_ of soht erroneously, and, with respect to three or four of thee from the customary forms which I have recorded Whether the name of the first letter should be pronounced ”_Aye_,” as it is in England, ”_Ah_,” as it is in Ireland, or ”_Aw_,” as it is in Scotland, is a question which Walker has largely discussed, and clearly decided in favour of the first sound; and this decision accords with the universal practice of the schools in Ah he treatedthelected the names of them all, except the first and the last Of _Zee_, (which has also been called _Zed, Zad, Izzard, Uzzard, Izzet_, and _Iz_,)[90] he says, ”Its common name is _izzard_, which Dr Johnson explains into _s hard_; if, however, this is the ross misnomer; for the _z_ is not the hard, but the soft _s_;[91] but as it has a less sharp, and therefore not so audible a sound, it is not impossible _but_ it may mean _s surd_ _Zed_, borrowed from the French, is the more fashi+onable name of this letter; but, in my opinion, _not to be adht to have no diversity_”--_Walker's Principles_, No 483 It is true, the naht to be one, and in no respect diverse; but where diversity has already obtained, and beco upon what is old-fashi+oned, aard, and inconvenient? Shall the better usage give place to the worse? Uniformity cannot be so reached

In this country, both _Zed_ and _Izzard_, as well as the worse forms _Zad_ and _Uzzard_, are now fairly superseded by the softer and better term _Zee_; and whoever will spell aloud, with each of these naizzard_, ht again into use The other two, _Iz_ and _Izzet_, being localisive up all six; _Zed_ to the French, and the rest to oblivion

OBS 6--By way of apology for noticing the name of the first letter, Walker observes, ”If a diversity of na, or declaring to each other the component letters of a word, it would be entirely needless to enter into _so trifling a question_ as the mere name of a letter; but e find ourselves unable to convey signs to each other on account of this diversity of naered by an ihly incumbent on us to attenificant as it ular pronunciation”--_Dict, under A_ If diversity in this , what shall we say to those who are atte reasons, or even pretending authority? and if a knowledge of these names is the basis of a just pronunciation, what shall we think of hiht to speak and write the and writing, cannot deal honestly, if ever he silently prefer a suggested ie of the language; for, in graeneral custoe can never be that which is little known, nor can it be well ascertained and taught by him who knows little Inquisitive in, and causes of things; and that instruction is the ratify this rational curiosity This isupon the present topic

OBS 7--The naiven to the letters were not mere notations of sound, intended solely to express or make known the powers of the several characters then in use; nor ought even the h formed with special reference to their sounds, to be considered such Expressions ofdictionary, having no reference to what is meant by the sound, do not constitute words at all; because they are not those acknowledged signs to which ahas been attached, and are consequently without that significance which is an essential property of words But, in every language, there must be a series of sounds by which the alphabetical characters are coed names of these particular objects, e It is a great error to judge otherwise; and a greater to iven letter shall be called by one name or by an other Who shall say that _Daleth, Delta_, and _Dee_, are not three _real words_, each equally is? Such names have always been in use wherever literature has been cultivated; and as the fored by the nations, and have becoes, there has necessarily followed a change of the names For, whatever inconvenience scholars may find in the diversity which has thence arisen, to nan tere to be learned, would surely be attended with a tenfold greater We derived our letters, and their naood reason why the latter should be spelled and pronounced as we suppose they were spelled and pronounced in Rome

OBS 8--The names of the twenty-two letters in Hebrew, are, without dispute, proper _words_; for they are not only significant of the letters thus naeneral, if not in every instance, soe Thus the lish reader meets with, and wonders over, as he reads the 119th Psalrammars, as follows:--

[Hebrew: Aleph] Aleph, A, an ox, or a leader; [Hebrew: Beth] Beth, Bee, house; [Hebrew: Gimel] Gimel, Gee, a camel; [Hebrew: Dalet] Daleth, Dee, a door; [Hebrew: he] He, E, she, or behold; [Hebrew: vav] Vau, U, a hook, or a nail; [Hebrew: zajin] Zain, Zee, are; [Hebrew: tet] Teth, Tee, a serpent, or a scroll; [Hebrew: jod] Jod, or Yod, I, or Wy, a hand shut; [Hebrew: kaf] Caph, Cee, a hollow hand, or a cup; [Hebrew: laoad; [Hebrew: mem] Mem, Em, a stain, or spot; [Hebrew: nun] Nun, En, a fish, or a snake; [Hebrew: samekh] Samech, Ess, a basis, or support; [Hebrew: ayin] Ain, or Oin, O, an eye, or a well; [Hebrew: pe] Pe, Pee, a lip, or mouth; [Hebrew: tsadi] Tzaddi, or Tsadhe, Tee-zee, (i e tz, or ts,) a hunter's pole; [Hebrew: qof] Koph, Kue, or Kay, an ape; [Hebrew: resh] Resch, or Resh, Ar, a head; [Hebrew: shi+n] Schin, or Sin, Ess-aitch, or Ess, a tooth; [Hebrew: tav] Tau, or Thau, Tee, or Tee-aitch, a cross, or lish names of the Hebrew letters are written with much less uniformity than those of the Greek, because there has beentheir powers This is directly contrary to what one would have expected; since the Hebrew nas than the letters, and the Greek are not The original pronunciation of both languages is admitted to be lost, or involved in so much obscurity that little can be positively affirra at disputed sounds in the one case, but generally preferring a correspondence of letters in the other

OBS 9--The word _alphabet_ is derived fro series The Greek letters are twenty-four; which are formed, named, and sounded, thus:--

[Greek: A a], Alpha, a; [Greek: B, b], Beta, b; [Greek: G g], Ga hard; [Greek: D d], Delta, d; [Greek: E e], Epsilon, e short; [Greek: Z z], Zeta, z; [Greek: ae ae], Eta, e long; [Greek: TH Th th], Theta, th; [Greek: I i], Iota, i; [Greek K k], Kappa, k; [Greek: L l], Lambda, l; [Greek: M m], Mu, m; [Greek: N n], Nu, n; [Greek: X x], Xi, x; [Greek: O o], Omicron, o short; [Greek: P p], Pi, p; [Greek: R r] Rho, r; [Greek: S s s], Sigma, s; [Greek: T t], Tau, t; [Greek: Y y], Upsilon, u; [Greek: PH ph], Phi, ph; [Greek: CH ch], Chi, ch; [Greek: PS ps], Psi, ps; [Greek: O o], Olish dictionaries explain the first and the last; and Webster has defined _Iota_, and _Zeta_, but without reference to theof the former in Greek _Beta, Delta, Laies or definitions of Johnson and Webster, both of whom spell the word _Lambda_ and its derivative _lambdoidal_ without the silent _b_, which is corammars, and which Worcester, more properly, retains

OBS 10--The reader will observe that the foregoing naeneral much less simple than those which our letters now bear; and if he has ever attees, he cannot but be sensible of the great advantage which was gained when to each letter there was given a short name, expressive, as ours mostly are, of its ordinary power This improvement appears to have been introduced by the Romans, whose names for the letters were even ent in respect to therammarians, both ancient and modern, that few even of the learned can tell what they really were in that language; or how they differed, either in orthography or sound, frolish or the French, the Hebrew or the Greek Most of them, however, may yet be ascertained froists; so that by taking from later authors the names of those letters which were not used in old ti the accuracy of which there is not much room to dispute It is probable that in the ancient pronunciation of Latin, _a_ was colish _a_; _i_ _ always hard, as in _coinal, native, or just pronunciation of a language is not necessary to an understanding of it ritten, the existing nations have severally, in a greatthis and other ancient tongues

OBS 11--As the Latin language is now printed, its letters are twenty-five Like the French, it has all that belong to the English alphabet, except the _Double-u_ But, till the first Punic war, the Roave it the power as well as the place of the Gamma or Gimel It then seems to have slid into K; but they used it also for S, as we do now The ancient Saxons, generally pronounced C as K, but souttural, or like our Y In sorammars the name of the latter is written _Ghee_ The letter F, when first invented, was called, froauished from I, was called by the Hebrew nauished from U, was called Vau, then Va, then Ve Y, when the Romans first borrowed it from the Greeks, was called Ypsilon; and Z, from the same source, was called Zeta; and, as these two letters were used only in words of Greek origin, I know not whether they ever received from the Romans any shorter names In Schneider's Latin Gra manner; except Je and Ve, which are omitted by this author: ”A, Be, Ce, De, E, Ef, Ge, Ha, I, [Je,] Ka, El, Em, En, O, Pe, Cu, Er, Es, Te, U, [Ve,] Ix, Ypsilon, Zeta” And this I suppose to be thetheir names _in Latin_, unless we have sufficient authority for shortening Ypsilon into Y, sounded as short _i_, and for changing Zeta into Ez

OBS 12--In es, the five vowels, A, E, I, O, U, name themselves; but they na to the different ways of uttering thees And as the name of a consonant necessarily requires one or more vowels, that also e there should be a knoay both of writing and of speaking every na to hinder, should be e_ I do not say that the nalish it is as easy to speak of two Dees as of two trees, of two Kays as of two days, of two Exes as of two foxes, of two Effs as of two skiffs; and there ought to be nothe word in the one case, than in the other In Dr

Sam Prat's Latin Grammar, (an elaborate octavo, all Latin, published in London, 1722,) nine of the consonants are reckoned ht, semivowels; f, l, m, n, r, s, x, z ”All the_e_ after thee, except _q_, which ends in _u_” See p 8 ”The se with _e_, end in themselves; as, ef, _ach_, el, em, en, er, es, _ex_, (or, as Priscian will have it, _ix_,) _eds_” See p 9 This raph; and so far as it does not, I judge the author to be wrong The reader will observe that the Doctor's explanation is neither very exact nor quite complete: K is a mute which is not enumerated, and the rule would make the naht semivowels, nor does the name Ach accord with his rule or see to his principle, would be _Ez_ and not ”_Eds_,” although the latter iven to this letter

OBS 13--If the history of these names exhibits diversity, so does that of al every ith correctness, and correctness tends to permanence But Time, that establishes authority, destroys it also, when he fairly sanctions newer customs To all names worthy to be known, it is natural to wish a perpetual uniformity; but if any one thinks the variableness of these to be peculiar, let hilish Bible of the fourteenth century, and read a few verses, observing the nae forth hye bitwixe tweyno knytis”--_Dedis_, (i e, _Acts_,) xii, 6 ”_Crist Ihesu_ that is to dee the quyke and deed”--_2 Tie has changed much, and at the same time acquired, by means of the press, some aids to stability I have recorded above the _true_ na of their history; and if there could be in hueable, I should wish, (with due deference to all scheht ree is desirable in our present names of the letters, it is that we may have a shorter and sie this well known nae _Alpha, Upsilon, or Oa_; and perhaps it would be as useful