¥808.J 
has never yet been done publicly; nei- 
ther has the error to my knowledge ever 
yet been publicly exploded, which is the 
reason why I have now ventured to ex- 
pvse it to the world, and to warn the 
good people of England to be on their 
guard against it. If any schoolmasters, 
or conductors of academies, should, on 
perusing this éssry, hear their consci- 
ences saying to each of ghem, “ Thou art 
the man;” (although moral turpitude is 
entirely out of the question) let them 
not be displeased at the writer’s animad- 
versions; and instead of attempting to 
vindicate what admits of no excuse, let 
them candidly begin without delay to re- 
ferm their practice in this respect, and 
teach their pupils a more correct mode 
of speaking. Whatever may be the 
faults of the inhabitants of the more 
northern counties in their colloquial 
style, they pronounce the words above 
enumerated properly, which the citizens 
of London and the inhabitants of Cam- 
bridgeshire, &c. do not. In the fastidi- 
_ ous ear of the latter, the pronunciation of 
the former may perhaps sound rough 
and disagreeable, whilst they imagine 
“that their own is softer and smoother, 
more harmonious, more delicate, and 
more refined; but I am sure the good 
sense of the people of London will con- 
vince them of the justness of this obser- 
vation, that nothing can he elegant which 
is improper. Itis aspecies of false taste, 
false delicacy and false refinement, which 
leads any person to entertain a contrary 
sentiment. Should it be urged, that the 
softest and smoothest sound is always the 
most proper, I must take the liberty to 
deny the position. The different lan- 
guages of Europe are by no means 
susceptible of equal harmony. Some are 
“naturally soft, and others naturally ner- 
vous and sonorous, As well might the 
’ people who use that endeavour to incor- 
porate into it the force of this, as those 
who speak the latter strive to naturalize 
the soft sounds of the former, The lan- 
goages of the southern countries are 
more harmonious than the languages of 
the northern nations. Euphony is the 
distinguishing excellence of the former, 
and strength is the characteristic per- 
feetion of the latter. The one is not ca- 
pable of much force, and the other is not 
susceptible of much euphony. Every 
oue ought to take the language of his 
country as he finds it, and not distort and 
pervert it: he should speak it according 
t@ its own genius, which, in the opinion 
Language, by the Citizens of London, Ke. 19° 
i ts 
ofable philologists, was originally adapted 
to and formed from the genius of the 
people. That of the English is mascu- 
line and intrepid. To cashier all such 
sounds then as mark this spirit, would be 
to destroy the nature of the English lan- 
guage, and render it puerile and effemi- 
nate. Let every one that speaks Eng- 
lish, speak it as an Englishman, and not 
aga native of Italy or France. [fhe pre- 
fers their languages to his own on account 
of their superior softness, then let him 
adopt the language of one or the other 
according to his fancy; but if he con- 
tinues to speak our Janguage,, he ought 
to take care to speak English, and not 
a la frangoise, as some persons do, when 
they say no, and pronounce it hke the 
French word non. Iam not sure that» 
the harsh and strong sounds, which occur 
so frequently in the English and German 
languages, are such great imperfections 
‘as some gentlemen seem to suppose. 
If euphony be an excellence in_one lan- 
guage, why should not a rough guttural 
sound which constitutes strength in ano- 
ther, be accounted a beauty? Besides the 
question rs not about the propriety of re- 
taining or rejecting the harsh sounds of 
our language, it respects rather the true 
pronunciation of the vowels, which are 
all soft, and perhaps equally so. The 
sole object of these critical remarks is 
the confusion made in the different sounds 
ofthevowels [have not observed, that any 
of them are discarded altogether, though 
people seem to like the right sound of the 
short a least of all. I have sometimes 
thought they wish to banish it out of the 
language, for what reason L know not. But 
yet when they come to articulate words in 
which the vowel w occurs being short, 
they, by a strange inconsistency, substi- 
tute the right sound of the vowel a, for 
u. Itis this absurd substitution of one 
vowel for another that is here censured ; 
and of the fact I am confident. I once 
heard a sermon preaciied from the pulpit 
of St. Mary’s Church, at Cambridge, by 
a gentleman belonging to the university, 
in which one of the sentences closed 
with the words unto us; which, as com- 
mon as they are, I did not at first under- 
stand, and it was not till after I recol- 
lected the connection that [ knew what 
he said. The words sounded in my ears 
like, and lo ass, for so he actually 
spoke them. He certainly deserved a 
reprimand for it from the heads of the 
colleges. At that illustrious seat of 
learning such an error was almost un- 
pasdonable 
