138 ROYAL SOCIETY OF CANADA 



widespread aeceptam-e in Eiiii-lish letters, does it not savour of literary 

 barbarism to seek for a ])h()netie pjnglish spellinu-, by substituting for a 

 poetically constructed word, a monnivl ortbography, such as is found 

 inclosed between parentheses in the ]»r()iiouncing dictionaries? And the 

 absurdit}' of the seeking is found in the variety of the grotesque results 

 already indicated. As well, it seems to me, might we object -to the 

 French form of our English word "champagne," and insist upon writing 

 it •■ shampain " or '•shanipane." as to persist in the anglicization of 

 ouananiche. 



The lake troiit, — forked tail. — lunge or touladi is fortunate in the 

 almost universal maintenance for the name of its variety, of the original 

 Fivnch ()rthogra])liical illusl ration of the Indian sound represented by 

 the pronunciation of nainaiji-u!>h. Hut in the case of another North 

 America tish, — e&ox nobiUor. — whose ])opular title in its original form, 

 like that of the ouananiche and namaycush, comes down to us, as correctly 

 claimed by Mr. Fred. Mather, irom its Indian nomenclature, an apparent 

 desire to get away from Fiench orthography has produced a somewhat 

 similar confusion of language to that already described in the case of the 

 ouananiche. The oi-iginal spelling of the Indian name was undoubtedly 

 •• maskinongé." and such it is still called in the Statutes of Canada, 

 According to ^[gr. Laflèche. ••maskinongé" is derived t\-om mashk de- 

 formed, and khionr/é. a pike, and was applied to the cso.t: ni/hilior by the 

 Indians because it appeared to them a defoi-med or ditferent kind 

 of pike from that to which they had been accustomed. The river of the 

 same name that flows into Lake St. Peter, which name was subsef|uently 

 extended to the town since Idiilt at its nioutli and to the county of which 

 it is the '■/lef lieu, was doubtless so called from the number of these tish 

 taken in or near its estuary, and after their Indian name. And it is a 

 singular corroboration of the absolutt' correctness of the French orthog- 

 I'aphy •maskinongé," that no less an authority than Dr. James A. 

 llenshall, the author of the paper on this fish in American Game 

 Fishes, following the nomenclature of Dr. Mitcdiil, and of DeKay in 

 Fishes of New York, sub.stilutes for nohilior. as the scientific; name of 

 this particular species, — masquinonijij. — which is about as near as it is 

 l)ossible for English orthogra]»hy to go in re])resenting the correct 

 ,])ronunciation of ••maskinongé." Yet Dr. llenshall claims that by 

 common consent and custom 1 lu^ name is ■• mascalonge " amongst the 

 majority of aiiulci-N and that mascalonge it will b(^ for generations to 

 c-oiiie ! Nor docs this iiimigi-cl name, which D]'. llenshall himself 

 emjiloys for the title of his monograph on the tish, I'Cpresent t lie full 

 extent of the departure from llie original nanu'. ILe gives us himself 

 amongst the various otlu'i- foi-ms, — muscalonge, muskellunge and mus- 

 kallonge, — the second of which istlie name emjiloycd to designate the 

 s))ecies liy Dr. C. Br(»wn (ioode in his Ainericaij, Fishes, and which is 



