WRITING. 
130AGE) tliat words, originally significant of 
one class of ideas, being applied to a se- 
cond, lost their connection with the for- 
mer, and became directly significant of the 
latter. 
2. We have reason to believe that words 
were originally monosyllabic in tliose na- 
tions where alphabetical writing was in- 
vented, and tliat the combinatiop of old 
sounds, or the use of them, uncompounded 
to express new ideas, was the mode em- 
ployed to extend the capabilities of their 
language. Hence tiie same word would 
frequently occur in combination, and though 
its different significations must originally 
have been represented by different hiero- 
glyphics, yet as these lost their significancy, 
they would easily become as extensive in 
their meaning as the sounds themselves. 
And it is obvious that the most simple of 
those hieroglyphics which were used for the 
same sound, would be employed to repre- 
sent the sound. 
3. It has been shown to be highly proba- 
ble that originally every consonant had its 
vowel sound. Hence all syllables might be 
represented by two, or at most three Euro- 
pean letters. This circumstance would 
materially diminish the varieties of syllabic 
sounds. 
4. The probability of the theory ad- 
vanced depends greatly upon the hypo- 
thesis, that originally letters were syllabic. 
The following facts appear to prove this; 
The ancient oriental alphabets had no de- 
notements for vowels, and even if this be 
disputed, it must be admitted that they 
had many words into which none of the 
supposed vowel marks entered. The Ethi- 
opian alphabet is intirely syllabic. The 
simple letters denote a consonant and a 
short a, and marks w'cre added to them to 
denote other vowels where used. AVhat is 
doubly singular, they have in many cases 
added marks to these syllabic characters, 
to denote they have no vowel belonging to 
them. In the Coptic and Arabic there are 
syllabic characters. The alphabets of the 
eastern Asiatics are principally syllabic, 
some with o, others with a, joined to a con- 
sonant. These circumstances render pro- 
bable the account here given of the transi- 
tion from hieroglyphics to letters. The 
following observations more completely as- 
certain its high probability. 
5. The letters of some of the ancient 
alphabets have so great a resemblance to 
the hieroglyphical characters ; indeed are 
?uch exact transcripts of them, that a sim- 
ple inspection is sufficient to convince us 
that hieroglyphics were the origin 6f letters. 
Ttiis, however, proves little as to the inven- 
tion of alphabetical writing, except that it 
was subsequent to the use of hieroglyphics. 
But, 
6. These characters, in many instances, 
retained their original significancy, which 
proves them to have been, as De Guignes 
supposes, denotements for words. We must 
not expect to find this significancy in all 
words of which they form component parts ; 
but in such only in whose visible representa- 
tion the original hieroglyphic formed a com- 
ponent part. Now we must observe first, 
that the names of several of the oriental 
letters are still by themselves significant, 
and that some of these letters are similar 
to the Chinese clefs, which have the same 
signification. Thus the ' yod signifies the 
hand. Its form, in some alphabets, lesem- 
bles the Chinese character for hand. The 
T dalcth of the Hebrews, Pheniciaus, and 
Ethiopians, signifies o gate, and the ac- 
tion of opening. The hieroglyphic which 
among tlie ancient Chinese represented 
a gate, is exactly similar to this letter. 
The S phi of the Hebrews and af of the 
Ethiopians signifies the mouth. The Chi- 
nese characters for the mouth all resem- 
ble it. The u ain signifies the eye. The 
Phenicians and the Chinese employed the 
outline of the eye as a denotement of the 
object. The lu shin in Hebrew signifies the 
teeth, and its figure is still found among the 
Chinese with the same signification. The 
n mim signifies water. The corresponding 
Samaritan and Ethiopian characters have a 
strong vesemblance to the Cliinese hiero- 
glyphic for water. Lastly, the n aleph 
(originally perhaps signifying ox) signifies 
unity, the action af conducting, pre eminence. 
The Phenician form of this exactly repre- 
sents the Chinese character for one, and 
every ac(ion by which we gre at the head of 
others. But these letters are not only signi- 
ficant by themselves, but secondly in com- 
binations. Thus ' was expressed by the 
monosyllable ya, ye, or you ; to tliis ano- 
ther monosyllable, which had equally a 
signification relative to the figure being 
added, formed a word of two syllables. 
For instance, instead of the present deno- 
mination of T daleth, we may reasonably 
suppose its original sound to have been da. 
The word yada, hieroglyphically repre- 
sented by a gate and a hand, is found in tlie 
Hebrew with a signification derived frona 
that of the letters composing it ; to east 
