380 The Future of the English Language. [J u ty> 



others, and no Englishman can tell with certainty how 

 to spell a word with which he is not already familiar in its 

 printed form. In both cases he may guess, and his guess 

 will sometimes be right and sometimes be wrong ; but 

 in neither case can he attain certainty. The anomalies of 

 English are so great and manifold that it is difficult 

 to exhibit them in a brief compass. 



The object of all alphabetic writing is the representation 

 of spoken sounds. For this purpose it is essential that we 

 should have a symbol for each sound, and that that symbol 

 should be used with regularity and consistency. An 

 analysis of the spoken sounds of our language shows that 

 we have thirty-eight distinct sounds, and for the repre- 

 sentation of these we have 26 letters, 3 of them mere 

 duplicates. This has led to the device of using two or more 

 letters to indicate a single sound. Had this been done with 

 uniformity all would have been well, but unfortunately no 

 system has been followed. Thus, an examination of 3000 

 monosyllables showed 145 different methods of indicating 

 the twelve vowel sounds existing in the language. Again, 

 every letter in the alphabet except j is mute in some words. 

 Why should we take the useless trouble of writing b in the 

 word lamb, seeing that the sound b is never heard in it? 

 If we take the entire range of English vowels, we shall find 

 that there are no combinations of our imperfect symbols, 

 and that they have 353 meanings. Taking the consonants 

 in the same way, there are 119 combinations having 251 

 meanings. There are forty ways of representing the vowel 

 sound heard in the word eel ; there are nineteen ways of 

 writing k, s, and n ; there are 26 ways of expressing the 

 vowel heard in isle, and there are 37 expedients for showing 

 the vowel in it.* Of the many sounds which are hidden 

 under the same symbol, most of us have had ample expe- 

 rience. The difficulties of knowing what sounds to attach 

 to the symbols are equally great 



As a Frenchman once found when he tried to explain 

 His complaint, for the spelling so bothered his brain 

 That he said to the doctor, "I've got a bad cow;" 

 When the doctor could only reply by a bow. 

 Again he attempted, " I've got a bad coo ;" 

 But the doctor was dumb. Seeing that would not do, 

 He bethought him again, " I've got a bad co ; " 

 And he thought that the doctor was terribly slow. 



* For a thorough exposition of the thousandfold anomalies of English or- 

 thography, we may refer to "A Plea for Phonetic Spelling," by Alexander John 

 Ellis, B.A. 2nd. ed. ; 1848. In this work, all the objections which have been 

 raised against a reformed system of spelling are not only anticipated, but 

 refuted with a clearness and fulness which leaves nothing to be desired. 



