86 Rev. J. Wills on Mr. Stewart's Explanation of 



sity of the assumption no longer exists. Let me now call the attention of the 

 Academy to the law of progress, by which the requisite facility is actually attained, 

 both in this and all the other cases to which Mr. Stewart's theory of acceleration 

 can be applied. 



So long as a direct and separate conscious attention is required to each of the 

 several letters forming a word, the process is that of spelling only ; the compo- 

 nents are separately and successively noticed, but the result (a wholly different 

 object of thought) is not perceived. 



How, then, does the mind proceed ? It slowly, and by much discipline of 

 thought and repeated efforts, acquires a stock of syllabic and vocal associations ; 

 that is, it acquires a set of complex ideas and represented sounds. In these, it no 

 more separately notices the separate parts of the syllable than the separate parts 

 which constitute the form of the letter. And let it be observed, that in difficult 

 handwriting, it is hy the syllable that the letter is known, rather than the converse 

 process. Again, it is pretty well known, that in correcting the press, it is exceed- 

 ingly difficult to acquire the habit of perceiving literal errors ; while compositors 

 in printing offices have been heard to remark an occasional difficulty in readiilg 

 words and sentences, from their habit of attending to the letters. 



Just in proportion to the expertness of the reader, and his intimate acquain- 

 tance with written language, the combinations become more extended ; and, in 

 consequence, the number and extent of the parts which escape notice also in- 

 crease ; as the letter became lost in the syllable, so the syllable becomes lost in 

 the perception of the word. Words acquire their visible symbols, and are dis- 

 cerned in such ill-formed scrawls, that no letter could be separately recognized ; 

 here it is evident that the general form of the word is enough for the mind. Even 

 common conventional forms of sentences are read with one single act of thought, 

 forming but one idea, registered by use ; and if any one wants an illustration, I 

 will refer him to the familiar fact, that in reading easy and idiomatic language, 

 the omission of words is often unperceived. The omission is supplied by the men- 

 tal eye ; it has become a portion of a known whole. To complete our view of 

 this case, a written word becomes identified with the meaning of which it is the 

 'visible symbol. By a further extension, a sentence becomes similarly identified 

 with a process of thought. Every one possesses a certain range of thought, all 

 of which habit has thus symbolized. And this range is various in its scope and 



