ih a 
affigned no reafon. It feems to me, that it may be accounted for 
in this manner: we cannot fuppofe that writing was improved 
even to this degree of excellence before language was in fome 
meafure cultivated: but one of the firft artifices, that occurs in 
the refinement of language, is compofition or the union of diftin@ 
words in the formation of new terms, which the encreafed wants 
and enlarged ideas of men in the progrefs of fociety would require. 
To exprefs fuch compound founds, the marks of the feveral 
conflituent founds would be joined together. It was foon ob- 
ferved, that many of thefe ingredient founds were the fame with 
others non-fignificant, that has occurred as parts of uncompounded 
words, that is, as fyllables: hence was eafily fuggefted the artifice 
of denoting fuch fyllabic parts by diftin@ marks; the combination 
and varied arrangement of which would reprefent the numerous 
words of language compendioufly, without the multitude of figns 
which verbal notation required. To this fyllabic alphabet, it 
appears to me, that one entirely compofed of confonants fucceeded. 
The mind being now accuftomed to analyfis, the refolution of 
words into fyllables would in time be followed by that of fyl- 
lables into their component elements. But the variety of ~ 
fyllabic founds chiefly arifing from organic articulations or con- 
fonants; and the number of vowels or fimple breathings being 
few ; men would be contented to give marks to the firft, leaving 
the others to be furnifhed by the reader. This conjecture be- 
comes more probable, if, according to the opinion of Lord 
Monboddo, fyllables in the primeval languages contained, each 
enly one confonant. It is alfo fapported by, and accounts for. 
the nature of the Hebrew and fome other oriental alphabets, 
which 
