ANALYTIC ORTHOGRAPHY. 275 
59 a. This forbids forms like wouldnt, &e., for would nt, had ut, 11, Iv, Im, you »v, 
we l, wer, he s, t will, it s, or tis, &e. French is badly written on account of this jumb- 
ling of the signs of entirely distinct words; writing as two, the five words “qu’ este’que 
ca,’ instead of ge s q ca. “Ah c’nest quune peinture” (Vadé, 2, 111,) ds ne q 
une, &e. ‘“L’soleil s’'léve (ib. p. 186,) j’ suis, j crois, 7 dis.” “Dans! tems que j’ l écoute,” 
p. 215. “Ht ou e’qu’est I profit?” (ib. 8, 193,) eus qe l profi? 
60. There is no more necessity for writing French y against az, inj at (I have,) than in 
writing the English abbreviation J thus, in Jam or Im. The fact that several words 
may make one syllable, or have but one vowel amongst them, has nothing to do with the 
question. The Slavonic prepositions 0, w, z, are written separately, like other words. 
61. Some think that t of tsh, not being quite the common ¢, requires a tsh character, al- 
though this ¢ (and d of dzh) might be marked by those who deem it necessary; but if ¢ in 
tsh is drawn back to meet sh, this may take place with the final ¢ of one word, and initial 
sh of the next; and with all coalescing or diphthongal pairs, giving to the syllables court- 
ship the sound of core chip; and using the English diphthong oy in saying rapidly “the 
law is just,” as if “the loys just,’ making three syllables instead of four. 
62. Although in Latin poetry the concurrence of two vowels, asin (Virgil, book 1, line 
177,) CEREALIAQVE ARMA, requires the first to be rejected, (making CEREALIAQV ARMA,) yet 
the measure may be preserved if we allow a diphthong to be formed, as in the same line, 
where w of UNDIS may be made the last element of a diphthong, the initial of which is na- 
sal A, the words being corruptA™ Vnois. Compare Ai with a nasal A, in line 41, noxA™ 
Er;—EJ, line 45, scopuLogvE Jnrixit;—U"J, line 46, prvU™ Jncepo;—i, OJ, line 48, 
GERO Kr, or GerV Er, &e. 
RULE 5. 
63. The Latin alphabet should be the basis, each letter being used in its Latin sense, and re- 
stricted to the sound it was made for. Latin orthography, as that of an Indo-Huropean 
language, exhibits words which still exist with the Latin sound. These, however few, 
should have the Latin spelling, unless this is inconsistent with the preceding rules. 
Rue 6. 
64. When a sound unknown to Latin has arisen, it should be provided with a new or mo- 
dified character. Rules 5 and 6 constitute the philosophy of notation, that alone by which 
the entity, comparative physiognomy, and history of words can be portrayed. 
65. The empiric mode usurps Latin letters for barbarian sounds, thus separating them 
from the elements with which they have been associated from remote antiquity. 
66. Professor Max Miller would have none but Latin letters used. This is too stringent 
a rule, as new letters should be added where new sounds have been added. 
VOL. XI.—36 
