oct. — mar. 1859-60.] in Roman characters. 239 



(p. 28 of printed pamphlet.) It is not very clear what they pro- 

 pose. If it is simply a comma above in lieu of the c? it is much 

 the same as what is adopted, namely an inverted or reversed com- 

 ma ; the latter being preferable, inasmuch as it cannot be mis- 

 taken for an aspirate. If the example given in p. 28 is rightly 

 quoted I must think it objectionable. The word L | » is writ- 

 ten l'nat. But what has become of the zabar before the ^> 



Shakspeare writes it la x nat, and the scheme adopted in the Report 

 would write it laxnat. Again if the above case is correctly quoted 

 the word (a nail) would be written n'l for there is no zabar 



(or a) between the ^and the J. 



It ""would be a great convenience if no Capitals were used in 

 writing the Romanised Oriental words. The original languages 

 have no Capitals, and their use is often inconvenient when the 

 diacritical marks have to be added. 



I presume that by the Government order of 12th Sept. 1859, it 

 is intended that the scheme set forth by the Sub-Committee is to 

 be adopted in official correspondence, though the wording of that 

 order is somewhat obscure, as it speaks of Sir Win. Jones' sys- 

 tem as modified by the Asiatic Society and Professor Wilson and 

 the Madras Literary Society, now I believe that these three au- 

 thorities do not coincide in their modifications, and it requires to 

 be distinctly stated tvhich modification is to be introduced. 



I would also submit that farther preparatory explanation should 

 be afforded before it can be expected that the servants of Govern- 

 ment can carry out their orders. Long usage in a particular mode 

 of spelling is not so easy to cast off at once. I find even Mr. 

 Elliot, in his ' scheme/ constantly writing Sanskrit with a c instead 

 of ak ; and in one of the printed letters of 1834, by a distinguished 

 advocate for pure spelling, I find ' Hindustani' spelt ' Hindust'hani.' 

 Again in a late order of Government which affects the unusual 

 spelling " taluq," (it should be ta'alluq) the old fashioned u Oolun- 

 goo" stands out in broad Gilchristian deformity ; whilst we have 

 " Mirasdar" and " Carnum" (it should be Karanam) as a set-off 

 against " fusly" and " Sheristadar." Again in the printed copy 

 of the address of the Governor of Madras to Narsingha Rao, I 



