92 On the Orthography of Hebrew Words. 



1 quiescent, quiesced in o and u, and is treated like the other qui- 



escents. 



The consonant power of 1 (w) was probably more ancient, as in the 



case of M, than its vowel power (u). 



Zayin. 



t had the sound of the Eng. z, and is best represented by that 



character* 



Hheth. 



n is admitted by all to have been a strongly aspirated h, and is best 

 represented by hh. K 



Tet. 



B is represented by t (with a dot under it) to distinguish it from 



Taw which is represented by t. The difference of sound cannot be 

 determined." 



Yodh. 



*i moveable was sounded like the Eng, y, and is best represented 

 by that character. 



i quiescent usually quiesced in e or i, and is treated like the other 

 quiescents. 



* otiant is entirely suppressed. 



The consonant power of * (y) was probably more ancient, as in 



the case of fit, than the vowel power (i). 



Kaph. 



3 had two sounds, according as it was written with or without a 

 Daghesh. 3 (without a Daghesh) was aspirated and had a guttural 

 sound like the Greek x or the German ch. 3 (with a Daghesh) was 

 unaspirated and sounded like k. 



3 aspirated we will represent by kh, (1.) because in this way we 

 adopt an uniform mode of representation for all the aspirates ; and 

 (2.). because this mode has already been adopted by De Sacy and 



it _ 



Stuart. 



Mem 



V, », 3, present no difficulty as to their sound or the mode of repre- 

 senting them. 



Samekh. 



is represented by s (with a dot under it) to distinguish it from 

 Sin which is represented by s. How these letters differed in sound 



