\ 



iio6 



Mr, Pickering on the Orthograjthy of the 



Now in wilting the Indian languages, it will often be fauntl extremely difBcult to de» 

 cide in each series of the vowel sounds, to what extent on each ^ide of the principal or mid- 

 dle point (as I have called it) we shall use the same vowel character, or when we shall 

 have recourse to the letter which is the representative of the next adjacent series. 

 _ From t!»ese considerations in the case of the vowel w3, though we have no difficultj 

 in using it to denote the sound of a in far, yet when we proceed in the series to the full 

 broad sound which it has \n fall, we feel a' repu-^nance (arising from old habits in our 

 own language) to denoting that sound by the single vowel, and are rather inclined to 

 express it by au or aiv. If it should be thought that it might be denoted by o (as in for) 

 it will be obvious, that this would only be throwing the same difficulty into another se- 

 ries, and we should then have to decide again, how far the letter o shall be employed in 

 that series, on each side of its principal sound of o in more. Now this broad sound {aw) 



though found in the European languages, is not commonly represented in them by the 

 letter J; and therefore foreigners, who should attempt to read any Indian larisruace. in 



which the simple a was employed to denote the sound aw, would inevitably be misled, 

 anu pronounce the o in father. It has therefore seemed to me better, in an alphabet de- 

 signed for general use, to employ aiv to denote this broad sound, and to reserve the 



/' 



I should use nit? and 



not au, because the latter has already the established power of a (Uphthong in the foreign 

 Janguages, equivalent to our diphthong o?t' in now, how, &c. but fli£;,being a combinatiua 

 Tiot in common use, would attract the attention of the foreign reader as a new charac- 

 ter, ?nd would not]ea<l him into error. Mr. Du Ponceau, after much reflection, pre- 

 fers using a alone for the sound of ait;, and then denoting the sound of a in father by 

 the diphtliong a-. His opinion much diminishes the confidence I have had in my own : 

 but as my plan was founded upon the idea of taking the common European sounds of the 

 vowels as the 6asis of the alphabet, I have thought it would be too great a departure 

 trom It, It I should give to the vowel a any other than such common sound. 



it wdl be observed, that I have employed tlie letter O as the representative of two 

 sounds ; that is, the long soam] of o in rbbe, tone, &c. and the short sound of u (as we 

 term it in English) in rub, tun, &c. ; which latter sound, as appears in the Table, 

 We often denote in English by o also | as in the words amo;i^, afcoi-t. &c. In confor- 

 inity with this use of the simple r.hararter o, I have, in the Table of J\''asals, emploved 



nasal owtig (Fj ench o7i) 



C 



and the short nasal which we hear in among, hunger, &c. Those persons, who have 

 not had occasion to analyze the sounds of our language and to remark how often we 

 represent the same sounds l.y diiferent characters,and rice versd, are not aware how ant 

 the ear is to be n:is!ed by the eye j or, in other words,how apt we are to iado-c of vocal 

 soumis ny the written characters which we are accustomed to employ in representinff 

 them ; and such persons may, perhaps, from the force of habit, feel a little repu&nance to 

 denoting by the single letter O, two sounds which, in our own lan'^uage, we have been 

 used to c_onsu!er as essentially different from e.ch other and to express, in general, by 

 the tw6 different characters o and u. A careful comparison, hoiever, of these two 

 vowel sounds, under various combinations of the consonant., will show that 1 

 diHer so m.te.ially as our various modes of representing them might lead us to sup- 

 po.e ; but on the contrary, that t^ie.r principal dilference is in their length or quantitf; 

 7cienc?/''^'K '7«''^:^^'5i'^ difference between tlieu-, (to apply the Ian|uage ofanothe? 

 wer onl?''^, almost 5aid to be less than any assignable one, and therefore they may 



hisrlort= n""'''^^' ^^^'"""'^ ^^^^''' '" ^^'^'St'«" t« the proof we have oY 

 strL! Pvi.W f ".''•^' '^u"" ^" examination of our own language, we see also very 

 for th!v r,M? f? ?1 " *^' ""'" <>r foreigners when attempting to'speak our language; 

 thev w^,d l-r J f P""?' ^".•' '^""'^ " by o ; as for exan.ple,1n oJr word 6«^ which 



they would write 6Qe, and would proDouncc6oe«. If, however, any person, who may 



the J do not 



