284 



DISCOVERY 



is still much difference of opinion, and a good deal of room 

 for alternative interpretations. That must be the excuse 

 for the method of this book, which, because it essays in a 

 short space, and perhaps overboldly, a systematic exposi- 

 tion of what appears to the author the essential framework 

 of the subject, is obliged to be a priori and dogmatic in some 

 places, and on the other hand to leave many important 

 topics undeveloped or, at most, but roughly indicated. 

 The aim is to present a picture, vaguely sketched in some 

 parts, almost blank in others, but, it is hoped, not too 

 much out of drawing." 



The book under review, since its foundation is essen- 

 tially biological, is necessarily based on McDougall's 

 Introduction to Social Psychology, and it owes much also 

 to Trotter's Instincts of the Herd in Peace and War, one 

 of the outstanding original contributions to Social Psy- 

 chology. If we desired to find any ground for adverse 

 criticism, it would be that, if the author is overbold in some 

 directions, he appears to us as being overtimid in others. 

 He seems to us quite unnecessarily reticent on abnormality 

 as dealt with by Dr. Bernard Hart in The Psychology of 

 Insanity, more particularly in regard to the split-up of the 

 ego which we find in people who, like Mr. Vale Owen, 

 seem to be honestly unconscious of an easily ascertained 

 fact, which is that the " revelations " which they pass on 

 to us are but revelations of the state of their own minds. 

 Then, again, when Mr. Tansley approaches the concept 

 of a Supreme Being, we become conscious of an increasing 

 aridity. The essential humidity of the atmosphere has 

 disappeared. We seem to have left arable pasture-land 

 for the desert. He leaves us with the impression upon us, 

 which may well be a false one, that He Whom we call the 

 true God is never more than a creation of the human 

 mind, like the gods of Greek or Roman mythology. Our 

 contention is that many things which have been omitted 

 are well within the scope of this work, although, of course, 

 it is quite \vithin the rights of the author to say " thus far 

 and no farther." The sudden conversion, for instance, of 

 a depraved and drunken man into a sober and useful 

 citizen does not seem to us to be outside the scope of psy- 

 chology as related to Hfe. So with those whose lugubrious 

 " revelations," if we accept them as Divine, would add a 

 new terror to death, and persuade us that annihilation is 

 the best thing that God can give us. Their subjective 

 nature should be explained to the multitude and to the 

 student, so that the use of " planchette " and the mental 

 operations involved in this and other playthings of 

 materialism run to seed shall be quite understood. We 

 are far from suggesting that this is an unbalanced work. 

 We are, to use the author's expression, merely indicating 

 some of the " blanks." We believe him capable of taking 

 us many steps further. Indeed, if we may parody one of 

 Macaulay's poems, and if we may take the " ranks of 

 Tuscany " as symbolising the possible cavillers, we believe 

 that, if Mr. Tansley decides to emulate mentally the 

 physical exploit of Horatius in "the brave days of old," 

 and will take the plunge, he will not only gain a firm 

 footing on the far side, but we shall find that even " the 

 ranks of Tuscany " will scarce forbear to cheer. 



A. H. L. 



Peelickay. An Essay towards the Abolition of Spelling. 

 By Wilfrid Perrett, Ph.D. (Heffer, 6s. net) 



Peetickay is a word the literal meaning of which we, 

 being slow in the uptake, have not gathered from a read- 

 ing of this little book. But actually it represents a new 

 kind of alphabet which, the author claims, goes a long 

 way in the direction of simplifying spelling. 



Spelhng apparently is the curse of school-life. Hours 

 and hours which might be employed in training little 

 boys in useful pursuits have to be absorbed in drilling 

 children in the spelling, the idiotic spelling, of many of 

 the words of our tongue. If children only knew, declares 

 the author, what a lifelong mess and muddle they are 

 letting themselves in for when they learn their ABC, 

 they would declare a general strike. Receive, beUeve, 

 seize, buccaneer, desiccate, chrysanthemum — what a suf- 

 fering these words have occasioned in us ! 



The new alphabet proposed in this book contains the 

 consonants of our own, each consonant now, however, 

 being allowed to have one particular sound onlj-. Several 

 new and badly-needed consonants are added to represent 

 sounds for which at present there is no adequate or logical 

 representation. In the new alphabet the vowel-letters 

 are dropped altogether, and replacing them are strokes, 

 mostly straight lines, wTitten in different directions and 

 above or below the Une Uke shorthand signs. For ex- 

 ample, w I m /, p — , \ 1 g "^ t , represents " We may, 

 pa, all go too," which students of Pitman's shorthand 

 wiU recognise as the time-honoured question of page I 

 of the handbook in a new form, characteristic of this 

 age. For the sounds of our English tongue (the writer 

 counts only forty of them, a number which very few 

 phoneticians would admit to be adequate) he proposes 

 definite symbols, and as the symbols for the consonants 

 are for the most part those at present in use, and as the 

 slopes of the vowel sounds which he recognises are all 

 formed according to a scientific plan, the complete alpha- 

 bet as far as it goes is easily understood and learned and 

 should not be quickly forgotten. 



When this is done, the spoken language becomes the 

 standard, that is, one spells with the Peetickay alphabet 

 simply as one hears. The surname Cholmondeley, if 

 pronounced Chumley by the Cholmondeleys, is written in 

 Peetickay as Chumley. Menzies may be written in several 

 ways in Peetickay according to the taste and fancy of 

 those who pronounce that surname. Since most words 

 have one standard pronunciation alone — which may be 

 learned from a dictionary or by hearing them pronounced 

 by those who speak EngUsh most purely, namely (it is 

 claimed) the inhabitants of Belgravia, Inverness, Dublin, 

 and Wallasey — the wTiting of English in the new medium 

 should not lead to confusion or to schism. 



The value of a scheme of this kind is of course very 

 great if it could be universally adopted. The present 

 generation of little children learning to spell and to read 

 for the first time would do so with very much greater 

 ease than any previous one. The difficulty is with our- 

 selves. To ask us to change the spelling of the whole 

 English language, not gradually, as the SimpUfied Spelling 



