Indian Languages in JSTortli America. 845 



R. 



U may preserve its common sound, which is fundamentally 

 same in the European lansuaces, thouiih 



diflferent decrees of force 



gn uuf^rea wiiu very 



b^ ctM. 



S should always have its common sibilant power, and never 

 be pronounced like Z, 



Sh will be wanted, and appears to me preferable to the com- 

 Mnations of letters now used by some European nations, to 

 denote that sound which we always express by sh, and which is 

 common to our own and many other languages in various parts 

 of the globe. The French express it by ch, which we have re- 

 tained in the word chaise^ and others horrowed from thnra. 

 But the use of ch^ in the Indian languages^ Avould mislead 

 readers of different nations ; for a German would pronounce it 

 as a guttural (like khj, an Italian like /r, a Spaniard like tsh^ 



&c. The Germans denote this sound of our sh by scli ; which 



coaibination, besides being incumbered with one more letter than 

 our sJij would indubitably mislead an Italian^ and an English- 

 man, and perhaps readers of some other nations; for an Italian 

 and an Englishman would pronounce sch like sic instead of sJu 

 It is, doubtless, in consequence of this ambiguity in the scli^ that 

 we so often hear the name of that northern region, which is com- 

 jnonly written KamfschatTca^ corruptly pronounced Kam skatka^ 

 instead o^ Kam4chatkay (or ICams4chatkay as we ought to call it, 

 if we wish to come as near to the Russian pronunciation as our 

 organs will permit, without an unnatural effort;) for, as we bor- 

 row the orthography of this name from the Germans, through 

 whose works we principally derive our information of that 



f 



