83 
1903.] E. H. Walsh —Tibetan Language , 8f Recent Dictionaries. 
There is no possibility of ambiguity or error. The separate 
letters n and ZTj g never follow each other; ng £ can therefore 
never be mistaken for them. Similarly dj n, is never followed by 
y ; nor 3 2 by h; nor s by ^ h ; so that ny for ^ zh for 
(ej, and sh for cannot present any ambiguity or be mistaken for 
anything else, and they have the advantage of representing the actual 
sound, which the present symbols do not. 
As regards (oj zha, it is true that in Lhasa, as noted by Jaschke, the 
difference in pronunciation between it and sha is one of tone rather 
than pronunciation. But the Lhasa man, though he will himself pro 
nounce sha in a low tone and not zha , is accustomed to hear those from 
other parts pronounce it zha and understands it. But in all the outly¬ 
ing dialects it has the sound of zha. For the western dialects Jaschke 
gives it as zha, and states that it has “the sound of s in leisure.” For 
the Southern dialects Lewin 1 gives it as zha and says it is pronounced 
like “ z in azure.” Desgodins, for the eastern dialects also gives it this 
sound and, writing in French, says it is pronounced as u Ja ” which is 
exactly the same. 
It also is distinctly zha in Sikhirn and the neighbouring southern 
dialects. 
With regard to using a for (3 ; this, again, represents its actual 
sound, and the only letter with which it could be confused is a ; and 
here the long mark over the latter is sufficient distinction aud one that 
lias to be employed in all other Oriental languages to distinguish a long 
vowel from its corresponding short one. By this do not let me be mis¬ 
understood to imply that a and a bear to each other the relation 
of corresponding long and short vowels. They are separate letters and 
bear no such relation, but the distinguishing long mark is one well 
known and employed in all oriental languages, and may equally be 
employed here, and it represents the difference between them actual 
sound, which the letters h and a now used do not. 
1 Manual of Tibetan, by Major T. H. Lewin, F.R.O.S. Calcutta, Baptist Mission 
Press, 1879. 
