214 Report on Writing Indian Words [No. 8, New Series, 



2. Shakespear's rule, is that when initial in a syllable, 

 it is represented by * (which is its medial form) placed over 



the vowel which follows it in pronunciation. Thus ^ ^ = 



arzl \J>\**< mu'dji ; but when it is not initial in a syllable, 

 (i. e. when it has a jazm over it) the x is placed after the 

 vowel which precedes, as Jj^jc* == ma^muL It will be observ- 

 ed that when £ precedes a vowel, Shakespear precedes it by 



x 



an aspirate mark, (as in rnu'dfi above) to which he does not 

 allude in his explanation. 



3. Wilson states that Sir W. Jones in his Memoir, 

 "proposed to distinguish it by a circumflex" and adopts that 

 plan himself. 



4. Richardson in his Persian Dictionary, as also Johnson, 

 use the Arabic letter itself. 



5. In the proposed "Missionary Alphabet" it is propos- 

 ed to render it 'h. 



6. In the Calcutta papers of 1 835-36 re-printed in Lon- 

 don 1854, it is proposed to render it by a dot under the vowel 

 to which it is attached. 



7. Dr. Lipsius in his] "Standard Alphabet," objects to 

 the circumflex over, or the dot under the vowel, as indicat- 

 ing a change in that vowel, whereas ^ is a full consonant, 

 and is distinct from a vowel. He indicates it by^ 



8. All these differences shew that the rendering of this 

 letter requires consideration. 



9. In the first place it is to be borne in mind that the 

 letter is purely Arabic, and by Arabic grammarians considered 

 a consonant. Under no circumstances can it be considered a 

 voivel, if only for this season, that it requires to be surmounted 

 by or subscribed with, one of the three vowel mark, in order 

 to its constitut ing a syllable. 



