ce 
86 TRANSACTIONS OF THE CANADIAN INSTITUTE. [Vot. VI. 
of grammatic process is easily discerned and hardly requires any prevent- 
ive from error; therefore, what we are presently concerned with is words ; 
how can their identity be safely established ? 
Language is the expression of thought and, as such, it is an aggregate 
of significative articulations. Therefore, in attempting linguistic com- 
parisons, the student should, in the first place, observe principally the 
sound of the words. In languages possessing an abundant literature, as 
the European and the Asiatic, the orthography is of no importance 
whatever, unless it be considered as a means of discovering the origin of 
the words. Thus the German vater and the English father, though 
possibly different to the uneducated reader, are nevertheless one and the 
same to the scholar, who knows the phonetic value of the German v. 
Likewise, in comparing terms from American idioms, it is of the utmost 
importance to penetrate oneself with the particular orthography of 
the writer, as a word which appears different to the eyes may sound 
identical to the ear. Thus the Navajo fava, “man,” may have exactly 
the same sound as the dévé of the missionaries among the Northern 
Déné tribes. 
Hence, while noting down foreign words or attempting linguistic com- 
parisons, philologists could not too carefully precise the value of the 
letters used or, when extra signs or diacritical marks are found neces- 
sary, they could not too minutely explain the peculiar characteristics of 
their alphabet.* Instead of this, we occasionally come across writers who 
not only ignore themselves such all-important phonetic peculiarities, but 
do not even scruple to do away with such of them as they meet in others’ 
writings. The most glaring instance of this unscientific carelessness 
which I have noticed of late is that of Dr. J. Campbell. The absence in 
his Déné vocabulary+ of the apostrophe or other corresponding sign, 
inverted letters, capitals, accent or diacritical marks destroys the last 
vestige of genuineness in many words which were originally but dubi- 
ously Déné. JI am wedded to no particular graphic system, nor do 
I think my own alphabet any better than that of others; but I hold that 
you cannot, without additional signs or graphic peculiarities, render with 
twenty-five letters an aggregate of more than sixty very different sounds. 
And this seems to be the place to recall a common-sense rule which 
imposes itself on the transcriber of a foreign tongue: always write in 
such a way that all the letters be pronounced and that they constantly 
have the same value. It is useless to insist on such a self-evident 
principle. 
* The reader will find my alphabet explained in my paper, ‘‘Déné Roots,’ Trans. C. I. vo. If], p. 153. 
+ Transactions Canadian Institute, vol. V., p. 214 e¢ seg. 
