1889.] ^^^ 



labors of many generations of the most gifted races known to history. 

 * * * That the written word in any case deviates from the spoken is a 

 fault which may, indeed, admit of palliation, even amounting to excuse, 

 but wliich it is an offense against all true science and sound sense to extol 

 as a merit." 



Such being the state to which our written speech has come, the natural 

 question to ask is : 



3. Is Reform Desirable ? — Such a question is answered in its own 

 asking. Reform or improvement is always desirable in anything. Whether 

 it is possible or feasible is another question. But let us see, briefly, why 

 an improved or reformed spelling would be desirable, by looking at some 

 of the benefits that would accrue from it. 



(a) It would tend toward a greater uniformity i7i pronunciation. — Upon 

 this point Whitney says : "So loose and indefinit is now the lie between 

 writing and utterance, that existing differences of utterance hide them- 

 selves under cover of an orthografy which fits them all equally, while 

 others spring up uncheckt. No small part of the conservative force ex- 

 pends itself upon the visible form alone ; wheretis, if the visible and 

 audible form were more strictly accordant, it would have its etlect upon 

 the latter also." 



(b) It would greatly economize time, space, labor, and money. 



"The amount of saving would depend," says Dr. J. H. Gladstone. 

 "very much upon the system adopted. The mere removal of duplicated 

 consonants would save 1.6 per cent, and of the mute e's an additional 4 

 per cent. In the New Testament, printed in fonetic tyjie in 1849, by 

 Alexander J. Ellis, 100 letters and spaces are represented by 83. As far 

 as printing and paper are concerned, therefore, a six-shilling book would 

 be reduced to five shillings." This is a saving of 17 per cent. 



But the question of economy ii- more far-reaching than we might at first 

 supix)se. In the President's address before the American Philological 

 Association, in 1874, he said : " The time lost by it is a large part of the 

 whole school-time of the mass of men. Count the hours that each man 

 wastes in learning to lead at school, the hours which he wastes through 

 life from the hindrance to easy reading, the hours wasted at school in 

 learning to spell, the hours spent through life in keeping up and perfect- 

 ing this knowledge of spelling, in consulting dictionaries — a work that 

 never ends — the hours tliat he spends in writing silent letters. * * * 

 The cost of printing the silent letters of the English language is to be 

 counted by millions of dollars for each generation. And yet literary 

 amateurs fall in love with these squintings and lispings. They try to de- 

 fend them by pleading their advantage in the study of etymology. But 

 a changeless orthografy destroys the material for etymological study, and 

 written records are valuable to the filologist just in proportion as they are 

 accurate records of speech as spoken from year to year." This brings us 

 to the next point. 



