1825.) 
we have no genuine character in the 
English alphabet. (unless: this were the 
primary,,sound ofthe etter! C) now 
tip of the tongue.against, the; junction, of 
the upper gums, and gliding ,it,) with firm 
presstire, a little way downward upon the 
teeth; whereas_the sharp,sound of. the 
M2X) in Chirth, chick, &e., will be found 
producible” in its highest perfection (so, at 
least) DP always pronounce it), ‘by placing 
the tip of thé ‘tongue against ‘the junction 
ofthe !lower (gums ‘and teeth, and giving 
the sibilant percussion as ‘the tongue re- 
tires from that;position’s:so that, in reality, 
the, pure and perfect. sound, of, T-is so far 
from being an integral part of the supposed 
compound Ch= X (Chi) in the class of ini- 
tials specified, that, perhaps, it is physically 
impossible to)implicate them ‘together in 
uninterrupted series. 'T, and the element we 
represent by SH, can, indeed, follow in 
such) immediate succession, as to appear to 
be efliciently implicated; but such succes- 
sion; I contend, ‘is not the genuine sound 
of the; English Ch, as will, I think, be ap- 
patent to any person who shall: perfectly 
and jattentively pronounce the two com- 
binations ‘or successions—wit shall, and 
witch all; oy, adopting the Scottish abbre- 
viation, w2’ for with, for the sake of a com- 
bination: and parallel, more obviously in 
point, from ‘the oral identity of the vowels 
wit shall, wi? challenge: It must, however, 
be admitted, that in this, as in several 
other instances, the position and action of 
the tongue in the formation of the element 
must; in some degree; depend upon the 
interior'form of the mouth, particularly as 
to, the jaw, whether it be inner or outer 
hung. 
* Lam aware that in this suggestion I 
have the high ‘authority of Mr. Horne 
Tooke, as well as many others, against me. 
Guts when we look’ into old writers and 
old records, and find that) such names as 
we: mow: write Chester, Manchester, Chi- 
chester;, &cce2;:o were heretofore uniformly 
written Cester; Mancester, Cicester, &c., 
Without.the H ; and find, also, that in the 
most remote provinces, where the old 
Anglo: Saxo pronunciation seems to have 
been, least innovated upon by modern adul- 
teration or’ refinement, these names are 
neyeyerthéless, in. this respect, exactly 
pronounced as we pronounce them—I ean- 
not: but think that we havea kind of clue 
to; the: original elementary power of this 
character: at deast'Lam: sure, that if the 
etymology of .words would not ‘be thereby 
obseured) (a:zircumstance to be so awfully 
regarded:\as to:eheck the zeal of ortho- 
graplic innovation), it would be a happi- 
néssin our linguage if the’ letter C were 
never permitted to’ make: its'' appearance 
but when this power was tobe assigned to 
ito In out! present! usage; ‘where -some- 
times ity has they quality’ of S;'and some- 
times that of K, und never has any’ pro- 
The Anatomy of Speech. 
117 
confounded with § and with K), and 
which we attempt to indicate by the 
eompound CH, erik 
0 SH.A stream ‘of air over the tongue 
rather more swoln towards’ the ‘front 
of the palate; while°the ‘apex' remains 
in) contact ‘with’ ‘the juncettire ‘of the 
lower teeth’ and gums,’ producés’ the 
CH, French,’ or English SH—as’ in 
chaise; &e.F rar Ba 2 
=TH.' By pressing’ the tongue 
against the upper part of the upper ° 
teeth, and sliding down the apex till it 
come in contact with the edges both 
of these and of the lower, a vocal im- 
pulse bemg given as the tongue per- 
forms this motion, we form the forcible 
sonisibilant heard in the words thee, 
this, with, &c. By simply advancing 
the tongue in slight contact between 
the teeth, without any pressure against 
the inner surface (the impulse’ of ‘the 
breath being given as the’ tongue’ re- 
tires), we produce.the simple sibilant, 
heard in the words theist, thesis, think, 
&e.f 
(To be continued.) 
perty or attribute of its own, it is nothing 
but a nuisance. 
+ Here, again, Dr. Darwin is for raising 
to the top of the roof. ‘‘ If the’ point of 
the tongue be retracted, and applied to the 
middle of the palate, as in, forming the let- 
ter K [Dr. D.’s way of forming the K], 
and air from the mouth be forced between 
them, the letter Sh is produced, whieh is 
a simple sound, and ought to have a smgle 
character.”’ I will venture to pronounce, 
that the retraction of the point of the 
tongue, to any such position, is not neces- 
sary for the formation of this element ; and 
with the position of the other parts of the 
tongue, which I find necessary for forma- 
tion of K, I certainly cannot at all produce 
SH. It is, however, assuredly a. single 
element. 
$ These are both of them’ simple ele- 
ments, and it is certainly great pity that 
we have not for-each of them a single dis- 
tinct character. They differ from: each 
other exactly as G and) K, V and F, 
B and P, D and T; and there is equal 
reason for their having distinc characters. 
Mr. Pelham of ‘Boston’( America); in’ his 
very ingenious “ System of Notation,’’ has 
proposed. ¢é for the former, and tf for the 
latter. If innovations» in ‘otn’ ‘alphabetic 
characters could be seriously thought ‘of as 
at once practicable and desivable, should 
prefer the restoration of the ‘Saxon 8 
for the stall, and the, Greek ©) for, the 
capital, ‘sibilant; anded> for'thé Small,» D. 
for the ‘capital of the sonisibilant)"o" °° 
