NAT ORE 
[May 26, Tom. 
A MODIFIED ALPHABET FOR ENGLISH. 
Sounds and’ Signs: a Criticism of the Alphabet 
with Suggestions for Reform. By Archer 
Wilde. Pp. 180. (London: Constable and Co., 
Lid. 2914.) Piice.4s. od. net. 
HE main object of this book is to advocate 
modifications in our present alphabet, so 
as to make it suitable for representing English 
sounds. On plates facing pp. 142 and 144 the 
suggested alphabet is portrayed; the capitals are 
practically identical with the small letters, but 
slightly more ornate. A characteristic is that no 
letter projects above or below the line; nor are | 
parts of each letter thicker or thinner than others; 
the character is what is termed “Doric.” The 
uniformity in height of the letters makes it pos- 
sible to bring the lines of print closer together, 
and so to save space. But, in the opinion of the 
reviewer, legibility is therebv sacrificed; Russian 
type, in which the general effect is that of printing 
in capitals, is not so quickly read by Russians as 
is English or French by Englishmen or French- 
men. In the example given on p. 20, of printing 
in Doric capitals, the effect is to dazzle the eyes; 
it is not easy reading. The author is not sanguine 
as to the adoption of his scheme; but he opens 
the interesting question whether if our alpha- 
bet is to be modified, convenience is to be 
increased by carefully choosing the form of the 
letters. 
He is a strong advocate of spelling reform, 
and looks on the proposals of the Simplified 
Spelling Society as good, having regard to the 
restrictions with which they have limited them- | 
selves, viz. no accents; no new letters; and as 
little change as may be, provided consistency is 
attained. The system of Ellis and Pitman, phono- 
type as it was called, narrowly escaped achieving 
success in the ’seventies; had Ellis’s health not 
broken down, and had his type not been destroyed 
by a fire, it is not unlikely that steps might have | 
been taken to introduce its use into schools. The 
type is easily read; it is also easily written, for ma 
| Who 
the script hand is not difficult; and there is a 
saving of nearly 20 per cent. in space compared | 
with ordinary spelling and alphabet. One of the 
most remarkable pieces of evidence in its favour 
is an account of an experiment by an Edinburgh | 
schoolmaster, Mr. Williams, who “proved that 
children averaging five years of age could learn 
to read printed books in phonetic type in one-third 
or one-fourth the time in which children of six 
or seven years of age could, without the inter- 
vention of the phonetic system, learn to read the 
common ‘Romanic’ books; and 
NO: 2326, VOL. 93 
when these 
_ younger children had been one session (between 
ten and eleven months) learning to read through 
the phonetic system, they could read books printed 
in the ‘Romanic’ type quite as well as the elder 
class which had been engaged durine two sessions, 
or double the time, learning to read without the 
intervention of the phonetic sys.em.” 
A considerable amount of space is occupied in 
a discussion of the English phonetic alphabet ; 
that is, what English sounds should be charac- 
terised by separate characters. The point of view 
is that of a southern Englishman; it is too often 
forgotten that among English speakers they are 
in a small minority. A large majority, for in- 
stance, retain at all events some reminder of a 
trill at the end of the word “star,” although in 
America, if the South be excluded, the “r” may 
be described as a buzz, rather than a trill. 
In Mr. Wilde’s vowel system different symbols 
are given to the “a” in “alms” and the “a” in 
“at,” and quite correctly; the difficulty arises 
when it is realised that it is indifferent whether 
the first or second sound of the “a” be used in 
such words as “castle” or “dance.” And this 
involves the question of a standard pronunciation, 
about which few people will agree. In the re- 
viewer’s opinion (to take the instance given), it 
is better to retain the one symbol “a” for both 
| sounds, leaving it to individuals to pronounce the 
«e ” 
a” as they are accustomed to do. Again, many 
English speakers make no distinction between the 
wo sounds of “oo” “im “boot” and) oot a 
here, again, it would appear advisable to let one 
symbol represent both sounds. 
This book is well written, and puts a case for 
a view of spelling reform which is not usually 
considered; if it should commend itself to the 
public to adopt new characters, no decision ought 
to be taken without attention to what Mr. Wilde 
has brought forward. 
Wises 
THE INDIAN ORIGIN OF THE MAORI. 
By Alfred K. Newman. 
(Christchurch, Melbourne, 
Lites 
are the Maoris ? 
Pp. 303+plates. 
and London: Whitcombe and Tombs, 
n.d.) Price 7s. 6d. net. 
HE origin of the Polynesians has long been 
ae discussed by more or less qualified persons, 
and a general agreement has been arrived at. 
Mr. A. K. Newman takes up the problem where 
it had been left by Mr. Percy Smith, the author 
ul “Hawaiki,” and adduces a great deal of evi- 
dence to prove that the cradle-land of the race 
was northern India—a view, by the by, which has 
