ANALYTIC ORTHOGRAPHY. 279 
writing, and it might perhaps be adapted to print.* But as it is an essential feature of 
shorthand, that every available sign shall be employed, that for English th would be as- 
signed to some other sound in a language without this lisp, which would destroy the unt- 
formity of notation between different languages. 
81. Seriptand print are essentially different in this, that as facility im execution must be 
a primary object in writing, the most complicated character can be printed with the same 
ease as the simplest one. But, notwithstanding this feature, a uniform notation for writing 
and print is perhaps desirable. The two kinds of common print, roman and italic, are 
copied after manuscripts, and the forms of written and printed Greek do not differ. 
82. The Cosmosphonography of Gouraud; is an attempt to construct a condensed writing 
character, which may be printed with separate types, specimens of which he gives. The 
author is said to have been a fluent lecturer in French, Spanish and English, but he has 
made no critical observations on pronunciation. 
83. Of conventional alphabets, the Cherokee is a good example. Sequoyah the inventor 
had a book in the European characters, which, as he inferred or was informed, conveyed 
intelligence, but in a mode as obscure to him as the Egyptian hieroglyphs to father Kir- 
* Henry M. Parkhurst (Ploughshare, Washington, June, 1853,) has proposed such a “Cosmophonetic Alpha- 
bet.” His alphabet is inconsistent; because, for example, surd and sonant marks were deemed necessary for p, b, 
but not for w, m. 
+ Practical Cosmophonography: a system of writing and printing all the different languages, with their exact 
pronunciation, by means of an original Universal Phonetic Alphabet, based upon Philological Principles, and re- 
presenting analogically all the Component Elements of the Human Voice, as they occur in Different Tongues and 
Dialects: and applicable to daily use in all the branches of business and learning, illustrated by numerous plates, 
explanatory of the calligraphic, steno-phonographic, and typo-phonographic adaptations of the system; with speci- 
mens of the Lord’s Prayer in one hundred languages; to which is prefixed a General Introduction, elucidating the 
origin and progress of Language, Writing, Stenography, Phonography, etc., etc., etc., by Francis Fauvel Gouraud, 
D. E. S., of the Royal University of France, New York, 1850. 
{ In his opinion (p. 76,) there is an “absolute identity’’ between the English an, l-en-t, f-on-t, s-wn-k, and the 
French nasal vowels an, in, on, wn, respectively. He assigns the Ckeltic vowel in fat, to French, German, Ita- 
lian, &c., and he considers the English ow in fount to be the vowels in nor and put. He says of the French vowel 
in peu, veu, that it is “a sound which the Hnelish learners of that language generally think so difficult to pro- 
nounce, although they use it a hundred times a day.” He assigns the French vowel in cewr to English cur, and 
finds French w in rapturous. The numerous versions of the Lord’s Prayer are given in their peculiar orthography, 
without pronunciation or translation, so that such series of Chinese or Cherokee characters must be useless to the 
great mass, even of philologists. No. 33 is a specimen of “Gothic” in Gothic characters, with some of the words 
improperly divided; No. 61 is “‘Mceso-Gothic”’ in Roman letters, being the same thing. The latter is credited to 
Ulphilas, the former, in the Ulphilas character, to Stjernhjelm, who gives a plate of it in his version of 1671. 
The foreign alphabets are in bad, and often inaccurate lithography. Some of the versions commence with the 
prayer, as the Hebrew, Ivish, Armorican, and Croatian; others commence with the verse (Matthew vi. 9,) as 
Gaelic, Welsh, Russian, and Cherokee, so that comparisons may be thwarted at the commencement. 
