1805.) 
attached to their language and its poetry, 
dyuke or dyouke. If we proncunce it 
otherwile, as dook, we ought alfo to fay 
moot, coor tor mute, cure; but, I truft, 
few will be found to favour fo evident a 
departure from analogy and eftablifhed 
ulage. » 
With regard to the word kind, it may 
be obferved, that when the letter z is pre- 
ceded Ey k, or g hard, itis founded, the 
better to unite the letters, as if an e were 
inferted before it: thus kind, fky, are pro- 
perly founded, as if written ke-ind, fhe-y. 
The fame ule of e takes place before the 
letter a2, when preceded by hard g orc; 
for card, carriage, garrifon, ate pro- 
nounced as if written ke-ard, ke-arriage, 
ghe-arrifon.* In tome words this found of 
@ is not very perceptible, while in others 
it is abfolutely receffary. This ufe of ¢ 
is taken notice of in Steel’s Grammar, 
p- 49, which fhows it zs not the offspring 
of the prefent day. At firft fight we may 
be furprifed, that two letters fo different 
aszand a, fhould be affected in the fame 
manner by the gutturals g and chard, and 
k; but when we refleét, thatz is really 
compotfed of @ and e, our furprife ceafes ; 
and we are pleafed to find the ear perfectly 
uniform in its procedure, and entirely un- 
biafled by the eye. (See Walker’s Didti- 
onary, p. 31-) , 
The anomalies in Englifh pronuncia- 
‘tion are undoubtedly many, and fo they 
muf be in every living tongue;+ but 
even anomalies, if reduced to fyftem by 
analogy and fair deduétion, fhould not be 
regarded as a barrier to knowledge; and 
this point, with regard to our own lan- 
guage, has, ina great meafure, been ef. 
feted by the ingenious author juft quoted, 
in his very ufetul “ Critical Pronouncing 
Dictionary.” 
Notwithftanding a corre&ted alphabet of 
the Englifh language is eagerly called for 
by W. B. and fome others, the real utility 
of fuch an alteration may be reafonably 
doubted. Though an alphabet were 
formed, that fhould contain a number of 
Jetters precifely equal to the number of 
fimple articulate founds belonging to the 
language, are we fure thefe fimple founds 
would not rapidly deviate from their al- 
* Surely this is a very fingular pronunci- 
ation ! Editor. 
Tt “Il n’y a prefque pas une fcule voy- 
elle,” fays a French writer, {peaking of his 
own language, ‘‘ une feule diphthongue, une 
feule confonne, dont Ja valeur foit tellement 
conitante, que l’ewphonie n’en puille difpo- 
fer, foit en alterant le Long foit en le fuppri- 
Mant.” 
r 
Remarks on Pronunciation. pe ei 
phabetical exaétnefs, when they became 
fubjeéted to thofe numerous combinations 
tnat are requifite to form a copious lan- 
guage? Would they not be liable to 
the {ame inftability, ariing from fafhion, 
from caprice, and a difregard of uziform 
pronunciation, that is fo much objected 
to our prefent language, both oral and 
written. 
Even thofe who have beftowed moft at. 
tention on the formation of a new and 
more confifient alphabet, do not feem to 
have thought its adoption very praéti- 
cable. There has not, perhaps, been a 
more accurite invettigator of the forma- 
tion of letters than Holder, whofe trea- 
tife on the Elements of Speech was printed 
by the Royal Society in the year 1669: 
yet he was chiefly led to ftudy the fubject 
from the laudable motive of difcovering 
a fteady and effetual way of inftructing 
deaf and dumb perfors; and after point- 
ing out the imperfections of our pretent 
alphabet, he very candidly concludes— 
‘‘Itis not to be hoped or imagined, that 
the incongruous alphabets, and abules of 
writing, can ever be joftled out of their 
poffeflion of all libraries and books, and 
univerfal habit of mankind. ‘This were 
to imply that all books in being faould 
be deitroyed and abolifhed, being fir 
new printed after fuch rectified alphabets 5 
and that all the age fhould be prevailed 
with to take new pains to unlearn thole 
habits, which have coft them fo muck 
Jabour.”” (Elements of Speech, p. rag. 
Hitchin, 1804. Tam, &c. De 
ar ee 
To the Editor of the Monthly Magaziue. 
SIR, 
TYMOLOGY, the fcience of Jan. 
guage being at prefent fo gene< 
rally cuitivated, and its real utility fo well 
underftood, I fhail make no apology for 
troubling your readers with a few lines up. 
on a fubject connected with them, which 
for fome time has confiderably occupied 
my attention: I mean the endowment of a 
profefforfhip in one of our univerfities, for 
the purpofe of preferving and cultivating 
the Celtic language, whofe various dialects 
once formed the prevailing idiom of our 
country; an eftablifhment of this fort, 
muft be fo highly interefting to the’ inha- 
bitants of alarge part of the United King- 
doms, that I am much furprized that 
fomething of the kind has not long ago 
been formed. Indeed, when we confider the 
number of Welfh who have received their 
education at Jefus College, Oxford, moft 
of whom mult have bern enthufiaflically 
attached to their language and its poctrys 
we 
