to 
work. Permit me, Mr. Editor, to make 
the following extrac from the above dic- 
tionary, for the further information of 
fuch of your readers as may not have 
confulted it upon this fubje&*. ** An ig- 
norance of the real compotition of w, and a 
want of knowing that it partook of the 
_fature of a confonant, has coccafioned a 
great diverfity and uncertainty in prefixing 
‘the indefinite article am before it. Our 
anceftérs, judging of its nature from its 
name, never fufpected that it was not a 
pure -vowel, and. conftantly prefixed the 
article az before nouns beginning with 
this letter; as an union, an ufeful book. 
They were confirmed in this opinion by 
finding the aw always adapted to the fhort 
uy, as an umpire, an umbrella, without 
ever dreaming that the fhort w is a pure 
vowel, and effentially diferent from the 
Jong one. But the moderns, not refting in 
the name of a letter, and confulting their 
ears rather than their eyes, have fre- 
quently placed the a inftead of an, before 
the long u, and we have feen, a union, a 
umeverfity, a ufeful book, from fome of the 
the moft refpectable pens of the prefent 
age. 
‘«* Nor can we doubt a moment of the pro- 
priety of this orthography, when we re- 
flect that thefe words a¢tually begin to the 
ear with y, and might be fpelled, younzon, 
youmverfity, youfeful, and can, therefore, 
no more admit of az before them than 
year and youth.” 
There is no doubt but this will be re- 
ceived, by every judicious critic, as a fa- 
tisfalory account of the ancient ufe of az 
before words beginning with the letter y, 
and the w when not apure vowel. It does 
not appear that our anceftors paid fo much 
deference to the ear, as tomake an excep-. 
tion to a grammatical rule, fo fimple as 
that which inftruéts us always to ufe 
an before a vowel. But I think Mr. 
Walker has fufficiently proved that 
they were at the fame time totally ig- 
norant that ~ was ever an imperfec? 
vowel. I therefore cannot but agree with 
your correfpondent that the ear has, in 
the prefent inftance, been very judicioufly 
confulted. With refpect to the ufe of this 
article before the afpirate 4, I think the 
rule rather arbitrary, which fixes that a 
certain number of words, in all about 
twenty-two, fhould drop the 4, and pre- 
ferve an before them, like words begin- 
ning with a vowel. A perfon who has 
been taught to fay a herb, a boneft, will 
afpirate the 4 in thefe words with as much 
#* Pase 3d. 
‘An before U and A. 
[Feb. T5 
eafe as in horfe, houfe, &c. Why, there- 
fore, except a few individual words from 
the force of the 5? Thisis a query which 
I fhould much like to fee anfwered by fome 
of your readers that may have time and in- 
clination to confider it. But it muft not be 
concealed that Dr. Goldfimith was of a 
contrary opinion, and that he thought we 
fhould write an before every word begin- 
ning with the 4, and of courfe not afpirate 
this letter at all. For in his writings we 
meet with ‘* az happy concurrence of cir- 
cumftances :—an handfome fortune:—az 
heart: —an hundred: — an head: — an 
handkerchief, 8c. &c.’? and, I believe, 
there is no inftance, in the courfe of his’ 
voluminous works, where we fhall find 
the article a before the a/piraie b. Now, 
we muft hardly fuppofe that fo accurate a 
writer as Goldfmith would uniformly 
adopt this ufe of az, without having fome 
reafon for fo doing. Perhaps he was no 
friend to the 4, and thought we might 
difpenfe with it in pronunciation, as the 
Italians have thought proper nearly to ba- 
nifh it from their alphabet, they never 
ufing it but in three or four words, merely 
for the fake of diftin@iion. It fhovld alfo 
be remarked that fome adjeCtives abfolutely 
requite the article am before them, though 
in their correfpondent nouns the & is 
broadly afpirated. Thus we fay, ** ax 
hiftorical work,’ though no grammarian 
would confent to ‘‘ an hiflory.’ And in 
the following fentence*, ‘* Nor could I 
avoid acknowledging that az habitual ac- 
quaintance with mifery feems: better than 
philofophy to teach us to defpife it.’* 
Here it will be readily allowed that to 
write @ inftead of az would caufe a difa- 
greeable hiatus, and of courfe be a breach 
of euphony. ‘The reafon affigned for this . 
remarkable deviation is, that the accent 
being on the fecond fyllable, and follow- 
ing the 4 fo clofely, will not allow the 
voice to reft fufficiently upon that letter 
to produce the afpiration; and I thmk 
this fatisfa&torily accounts for it. ~ I hope, 
Mr. Editor, you will excufe my trefpaf- - 
fing fo much upon your valuable work, 
with a fubjeét, which, in the opinion of 
fome, may be deemed trifling, I fhall 
therefore conclude with obferving; that it 
ftill remains for fome able band to give a 
fatisfactory reafon for adopting what is 
called the /lent 4, and to determine 
whether reafon or analogy juftify the pre- 
fent arbitrary ufe of it. 
Tam, &c. 
Pontefrat, Dec. 24, 1800. 
oO. 
* Goldimith’s Efiays. 
Ta 
