I 



NOTES 117 



important than the written language, and is the true language. Is it ? 

 The written language is the crystal, the spoken dialects are merely a series 

 of impure solutions. The written language is the vertebral column without 

 which speech melts away like a jelly-fish on the beach. Lloyd used to argue 

 that everyone should write in the I. P. A. alphabet and in his own pronunci- 

 ation ; but this would mean the breaking up of the language into innumerable 

 dialects — which is not to the interest of humanity. We do not wish the 

 Tower of Babel to be restored ; and the Poet Laureate has done a service 

 in calling attention to the mischievous disintegrative tendencies of some 

 of these wild theories of phoneticians. Proper pronunciation ought to 

 be taught in the schools, rather than the writing of bad pronunciation-; 

 and when the authors of the Dictionary actually find fault with modern 

 teachers for inculcating the former I think (and Mr. Bridges decides) 

 that their argument is pernicious. The authors say, "It is a regrettable 

 fact that most pronouncing dictionaries definitely encourage many of the 

 modern spelling-pronunciations. We feel that such artificialities cannot 

 but impair the beauty of the language." And they would have us say 

 iksept, ikstrawdnri, awfn, and seprit ! There is no accounting for tastes — 

 or arguments. 



But the breaking-up of our far-flung language owing to the inadequacy 

 of our spelling is a real danger. The pronunciation of most of our words of 

 southern origin can generally be gathered from the spelling by those who 

 know the rules — which are, I believe, never taught in the schools ; but our 

 words of northern origin, especially the monosyllables, are so badly spelt 

 that no one can pronounce them at sight. Reform would be easy ; but 

 unfortunately there is so little intellectual life in this country that the 

 inertia of stupidity remains unconquerable. I have before me as I write 

 the Poet Laureate's excellent tract on English Pronunciation ; and I wish 

 he could be induced to lead a movement towards amendment. The Simpli- 

 fied Spelling Society has worked hard ; but it has tried to force on the 

 public a system which is, in my opinion, by no means the best possible. I 

 myself would advise quite another line of action — chiefly the return to some 

 old styles of spelling which have been superseded by worse ones of to-day. 

 See also my article in Science Progress, October 1913. But this is a seprit 

 biznis. 



Modern Literary Criticism (R.R.) 



Some two years ago I ventured to criticise modern critics for some of 

 their dogmas,^ and I was glad to see lately that Mr. Alfred Noyes took up 

 the same task in his lecture at the Royal Institution on January 24th. One 

 must be careful because we observe that some of these gentlemen are quite 

 supreme in their art. Thus the Aiheiiisum admitted that Lord Fisher is a 

 great man, but not so great as itself when the judgment of poetry is con- 

 cerned ; and apparently the modern literary critics are the best who have 

 ever existed. As I pointed out, and as Mr. Noyes complains, their task at 

 present is to lash the Victorian Age. Almost every review pours scorn on 

 the wretched writers of that time — chiefly because they showed evidence of 

 rhythm, design, object, and even such a shameful thing as knowledge. Thus 

 one of the heaven-born declared a few months ago that " the last word on 

 the mannered subtleties of the late Victorian poets was said by Charles Sorley, 

 whose style he [Sorley] thus compliments and condemns : ' It teems with 

 sharp saws and rich sentiment ; it is a marvel of delicate technique ; it pleases, 

 it flatters, it charms, it soothes ; it is a living lie.' " Mr. Noyes mentions 



^ Science Progress, July 1917. 



