268 POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY 



Such being the early development of our ' system ' of English spell- 

 ing, it requires a peculiarly religious spirit to discover in it anything 

 sacred or worthy of special protection. The only protection that can 

 be reasonably asked is the protection of the individual from the trouble 

 of changing his habits, and this collectively means the protection of 

 society from the confusion and general inconvenience that would result 

 from sudden change of any kind if this could be effected by radical 

 reformers. No language exists in which the spelling is even approxi- 

 mately phonetic. Italian, Spanish and German are among the most 

 nearly exemplary tongues ; but any one who studies German in America 

 and then goes to Germany to spend a year or two, gradually discovers 

 a good many words of which he has to change his pronunciation. The 

 contrast, however, between German and English is conspicuous. It 

 would be a waste of time to dilate upon the inconsistencies, the foolish 

 freaks and stupid absurdities of English spelling and pronunciation. 

 The facts are quite generally admitted by all who possess even an 

 elementary knowledge of linguistics. The practical question is merely 

 that propounded thirty-five years ago by a famous criminal, ' What are 

 you going to do about it ? ' 



Let it be granted that printers of various grades of ignorance dur- 

 ing the last three or four centuries have accustomed the English-speak- 

 ing public to the most inconsistent spelling with which any civilized 

 people is loaded. All of us have spent months and years of early life 

 in the effort to learn this spelling, not because there is anything edu- 

 cative about it, but because of the unwritten law that inability to spell 

 ' correctly ' is a sign of illiteracy. During the childhood of the present 

 writer this idea was emphasized to such an extent that in the spelling 

 class common words were of little interest. He was trained to feel a 

 certain pride in his ability to spell promptly and unerringly such test 

 words as gauge, hough, sough, fuchsia, bdellium, phthisical, eleemosy- 

 nary, metempsychosis, and tragododidascalicological. The spelling 

 match each week was a source of excitement, perhaps comparable in a 

 small way with such modern dissipation as bridge or football. All 

 of us have gone through this mill with varying grades of success so 

 that our eyes have become accustomed to the absurdities, and our as- 

 sociations are violated when we look upon improved forms. It is easier 

 to recognize 'though' than 'tho'; 'through' than 'thru'; 'kissed' 

 than 'kist'; 'rhyme' than 'rime'; 'thoroughly' than 'thoroly.' 

 Most persons think the improved forms unsightly. This means nothing 

 except that they are unfamiliar. 



To reform our language to such an extent as to make it logical 

 and consistent is scarcely conceivable. Attempts to do so have been 

 made on paper, but practically they have resulted in nothing better 

 than rainbow chasing. Our alphabet is radically bad, having a super- 

 fluity of symbols for certain simple sounds, and no single symbols for 



