
236 
ed, but which may eafily have arifen from 
the gradual changes in pronunciation. 
Ray, in his Catalogue of _Provincial 
Terms, fays, that the found of gh is un- 
known. In turning over the leaves of a 
German dictionary, I was furprifed to 
find, that a large proportion of thofe words 
have a nearly correfponding orthography 
in that language. A few examples will 
fufice: Fight, LeicaT; the light, DAs 
LICHT 3 the might, DIE NACHT 3 40 laugh, 
LACHEN 3 mighty, MACHTIG; right, Das 
RECHT ; fight, DAS GEFEGHT 3 togua/), 
KNIRSCHEN; hark, nHORCH; to think, 
thought, DENKEN,, GEDACHT 3 though, 
DOCH. The initial #’s are rapidly founded 
in the German. 
Iris not enough to fuppofe that the 
words may have been adopted, and the 
founds fottened; for how then came they 
into Scotland and Ireland? 
In the reign of Henry VIII. the Welth 
petitioned* tobe admitted to a full partici- 
pation inthe Englifh Jaws. In their, Me- 
morial, they apologize for the pecuhiari- 
ties of their language; they mention their 
guttural founds, but fpeak of them rather 
as being feldom found in the Englifh, 
than as being abfolutely foreign to it. 
That fuch founds are natural, or fuch 
as a rude people would form, is evinced, 
not merely by the Welfh and German, 
both of which are vindicated as primitive 
tongues: Vaillant ftates, that among the 
Hottentots there are feveral gradations of 
what he calis clucking, and defcribes as a 
guttural. This fame found, too, is thought 
to be the Greek x. 
Irs difule in our language will be confi- 
dered as a proof of the delicacy of our 
organs: perhaps it 1s the reverfe. When 
foftly delivered, and thrown from the 
threat upon the palate by-a well-bred 
German, it is very far from being un- 
pleafant; it being not very diftinguifhable 
irom the y, which of all our founds moft 
.nearly relembles the ¢/. Perhaps the want 
of fkill in producing a pleafing found has 
cauled us to negleét and ultimately lofe it. 
Whether the lofs fhould be regretted 
may be doubted; it is evident that the 
German is enriched by it. But, on the 
other hand, the & is more diftinét, as well 
as more eafily uttered. 
‘In the German, the pronunciation and 
orthography are often at variance; and 
jrom the old Englith writers we> find that 
anciently the y, g, ch, gh, &, are often con- 
- founded. The German participle is made 
— 

* See Appendix to Warrington’s Hiftory of 
Wales, 
On Guttural Sounds. 
[April 1, 
by prefixing ge, and every one knows that 
y anciently performed the fame office with 
us. There are other proofs of the fimila-. 
rity between ge and y; our ancient y-qwis 
an{wers exactly to GEWiss. 
Thefe remarks exprefs, without a form- 
al ftatement, the information that is de- 
fired. . 
Whether the prefent tafte for German 
literature has its origin in a juft perception 
of real excellence, or in the mere thirft of 
noveliy, is at prefent a fubje& of difpute ; 
but one advantage muft {pring frem it,— 
it will promote a correé& knowledge of our 
own language. It has been the common 
argument to prove the utility of Latin, 
even to thofe who never purfue the ftudy 
of it, that it teaches Englifh: this remark 
is infinitely more applicable to the Ger- 
man. Ie is in the’ ftudy of the German 
Janguage, above all others, that the Eng- 
lifh {cholar will underftand the analogy of 
his own; it is there we muft feek for the 
explanation of our conftruétion and fyn- 
tax, our’particles, and our auxiliary verbs. 
SINBORON. 
ee 
Ta the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
LTHOUGH the unavoidable fluftu- 
ation of human affairs, the caprice of 
the fafhionable, the difcoveries of the learn- 
ed, with feveral other caufes, preclude all 
hope of uniformity and ftability in a living 
language; yet every attempt to free it from 
uncouth and ungrammatical phrafes fhould 
be received favourably, and confidered im~ 
partially. In this view, your correfpondent, 
Mr. Bannantine*, has deferved well of 
you and the public. His lift of Scotti- 
cifms is far from being complete ; and in- 
deed any thing like a complete enumera- 
tion of the phrafes peculiar to that, or any 
other large divifion of the Britifh domi- 
nicns, could not be eafily given; nor 
perhaps would it be poffible to comprefs 
it into the fpace which you can allot to 
any one fubject. Mr. Bannantine’s lift 
is, however, fuller than Mr. Hume’s, the 
only one worthy of notice, except Mr, Ban- 
nantine’s, which I have feen; but it 
would be flattery to aflirm, that it is fupe- 
rior in other refpeéts. Your mifcellany, 
with al] its excellencies, cannot be expect- 
ed to be uniformly fupplied with produc- 
tions like thofe of our countrymen, Hume, 
or his fuccefsful-antagonift, Beattie, Who, 
I apprehend, has alfo publifhed’a lift of 
Scotticifms. If you are difpofed to. infert 

* See our Number for Dec. 1798. 
ie any 
