92 On the Orthography of Hebrew Words. 



1 quiescent, quiesced in o and u, and is treated like the other qui- 

 escents. 



The consonant power of T (w) was probably more ancient, as in the 

 case of N, than its vowel power (u). 



Zaym. 

 t had the sound of the Eng. z, and is best represented by that 

 character. 



Hheth. 



n is admitted by all to have been a strongly aspirated h, and is best 

 represented by hh. 



Tet. 



. u is represented by t (with a dot under it) to distinguish it from 

 Taw which is represented by t. The difference of sound cannot be 

 determined. 



Yddh. 



1 moveable was sounded like the Eng. y, and is best represented 

 by that character. 



1 quiescent usually quiesced in e or i, and is treated like the other 

 quiescents. 



1 otiant is entirely suppressed. 



The corisonant power of "• (y) was probably more ancient, as in 

 the case of N, than the vowel power (i). 



Kaph. 



S had two sounds, according as it was written with or without a 

 Daghesh. d (without a Daghesh) was aspirated and had a guttural 

 sound like the Greek x or the German ch. ^ (with a Daghesh) was 

 unaspirated and sounded like k. 



'D aspirated we will represent by kh, (1.) because in this way we 

 adopt an uniform mode of representation for all the aspirates ; and 

 (2.) because this mode has already been adopted by De Sacy and 



Stuart. 



Lamedh, Mem, Nun. 



"b, J3, 3, present no difficulty as to their sound or the mode of repre- 

 senting them. 



Samekh. 



D is represented by s (with a dot under it) to- distinguish it from 

 Sin which is represented by s. How these letters differed in sound 



