The Grammar of English Grammars Part 27

OBS. 10.--As the authors of many recent spelling-books--Cobb, Emerson, Burhans, Bolles, Sears, Marshall, Mott, and others--are now contending for this "_superfluous letter_," in spite of all the authority against it, it seems proper briefly to notice their argument, lest the student be misled by it. It is summed up by one of them in the following words: "In regard to _k_ after _c_ at the end of words, it may be sufficient to say, that its omission has never been attempted, except in a _small portion_ of the cases _where_ it occurs; and that _it_ tends to an erroneous p.r.o.nunciation of derivatives, as in _mimick, mimicking_, where, if the _k_ were omitted, _it_ would read mimicing; and as _c_ before _i_ is always sounded like _s, it_ must be p.r.o.nounced _mimising_. Now, since _it_ is never omitted in monosyllables, _where it_ most frequently occurs, as in _block, clock_, &c., and _can be in a part only_ of polysyllables, it is thought better to preserve it in all cases, by _which_ we have one general rule, in place of several irregularities and exceptions that must follow its partial omission."--_Bolles's Spelling-Book_, p. 2. I need not tell the reader that these two sentences evince great want of care or skill in the art of grammar. But it is proper to inform him, that we have in our language eighty-six monosyllables which end with _ck_, and from them about fifty compounds or derivatives, which of course keep the same termination. To these may be added a dozen or more which seem to be of doubtful formation, such as _huckaback, pickapack, gimcrack, ticktack, picknick, barrack, knapsack, hollyhock, shamrock, hammock, hillock, hammock, bullock, roebuck_. But the verbs on which this argument is founded are only six; _attack, ransack, traffick, frolick, mimick_, and _physick_; and these, unquestionably, must either be spelled with the k, or must a.s.sume it in their derivatives. Now that useful cla.s.s of words which are generally and properly written with final _c_, are about _four hundred and fifty_ in number, and are all of them either adjectives or nouns of regular derivation from the learned languages, being words of more than one syllable, which have come to us from Greek or Latin roots. But what has the doubling of _c_ by _k_, in our native monosyllables and their derivatives, to do with all these words of foreign origin? For the reason of the matter, we might as well double the _l_, as our ancestors did, in _naturall, temporall, spirituall_, &c.

OBS. 11.--The learner should observe that some letters incline much to a duplication, while gome others are doubled but seldom, and some, never.

Thus, among the vowels, _ee_ and _oo_ occur frequently; _aa_ is used sometimes; _ii_, never--except in certain Latin words, (wherein the vowels are separately uttered,) such as _Horatii, Veii, iidem, genii_. Again, the doubling of _u_ is precluded by the fact that we have a distinct letter called _Double-u_, which was made by joining two Vees, or two Ues, when the form for _u_ was _v_. So, among the consonants, _f, l, and s_, incline more to duplication, than any others. These letters are double, not only at the end of those monosyllables which have but one vowel, as _staff, mill, pa.s.s_; but also under some other circ.u.mstances. According to general usage, final _f_ is doubled after a single vowel, in almost all cases; as in _bailiff, caitiff, plaintiff, midriff, sheriff, tariff, mastiff_: yet not in _calif_, which is perhaps better written _caliph_. Final _l_, as may be seen by Rule 8th, admits not now of a duplication like this; but, by the exceptions to Rule 4th, it is frequently doubled when no other consonant would be; as in _travelling, grovelling_; unless, (contrary to the opinion of Lowth, Walker, and Webster,) we will have _fillipping, gossipping_, and _wors.h.i.+pping_, to be needful exceptions also.

OBS. 12.--Final _s_ sometimes occurs single, as in _alas, atlas, bias_; and especially in Latin words, as _virus, impetus_; and when it is added to form plurals, as _verse, verses_: but this letter, too, is generally doubled at the end of primitive words of more than one syllable; as in _carca.s.s, compa.s.s, cuira.s.s, hara.s.s, trespa.s.s, embarra.s.s_. On the contrary, the other consonants are seldom doubled, except when they come under Rule 3d. The letter _p_, however, is commonly doubled, in some words, even when it forms a needless exception to Rule 4th; as in the derivatives from _fillip, gossip_, and perhaps also _wors.h.i.+p_. This letter, too, was very frequently doubled in Greek; whence we have, from the name of Philip of Macedon, the words _Philippic_ and _Philippize_, which, if spelled according to our rule for such derivatives, would, like _galloped_ and _galloper, siruped_ and _sirupy_, have but one _p_. We find them so written in some late dictionaries. But if _fillipped, gossipped_, and _wors.h.i.+pped_, with the other derivatives from the same roots, are just and necessary exceptions to Rule 4th, (which I do not admit,) so are these; and for a much stronger reason, as the cla.s.sical scholar will think. In our language, or in words purely English, the letters _h, i, j, k, q, v, w, x_, and _y_, are, properly speaking, never doubled. Yet, in the forming of _compounds_, it may possibly happen, that two Aitches, two Kays, or even two Double-ues or Wies, shall come together; as in _withhold, brickkiln, slowwoorm, bayyarn_.

OBS. 13.--There are some words--as those which come from _metal, medal, coral, crystal, argil, axil, cavil, tranquil, pupil, papil_--in which the cla.s.sical scholar is apt to violate the a.n.a.logy of English derivation, by doubling the letter _l_, because he remembers the _ll_ of their foreign roots, or their foreign correspondents. But let him also remember, that, if a knowledge of etymology may be shown by spelling metallic, metalliferous, metallography, metallurgic, metallurgist, metallurgy, medallic, medallion, crystallize, crystalline, argillous, argillaceous, axillar, axillary, cavillous, cavillation, papillate, papillous, papillary, tranquillity, and pupillary, with double _l_, ignorance of it must needs be implied in spelling metaline, metalist, metaloid, metaloidal, medalist, coralaceous, coraline, coralite, coralinite, coraloid, coraloidal, crystalite, argilite, argilitic, tranquilize, and pupilage, in like manner. But we cannot well double the _l_ in the former, and not in the latter words. Here is a choice of difficulties. Etymology must govern orthography. But what etymology? our own, or that which is foreign? If we say, both, they disagree; and the mere English scholar cannot know when, or how far, to be guided by the latter.

If a Latin diminutive, as _papilla_ from _papula_ or _papa, pupillus_ from _pupus_, or _tranquillus_ from _trans_ and _quietus_, happen to double an _l_, must we forever cling to the reduplication, and that, in spite of our own rules to the contrary? Why is it more objectionable to change _pupillaris_ to _pupilary_, than _pupillus_ to _pupil_? or, to change _tranquillitas_ to _tranquility_, than _tranquillus_ to _tranquil_? And since _papilous, pupilage_, and _tranquilize_ are formed from the English words, and not directly from the Latin, why is it not as improper to write them with double _l_, as to write _perilous, va.s.salage_, and _civilize_, in the same manner?

OBS. 14.--If the practice of the learned would allow us to follow the English rule here, I should incline to the opinion, that all the words which I have mentioned above, ought to be written with single _l_.

Ainsworth exhibits the Latin word for _coral_ in four forms, and the Greek word in three. Two of the Latin and two of the Greek have the _l_ single; the others double it. He also spells "_coraliticus_" with one _l_, and defines it "A sort of white marble, called _coraline_." [120] The Spaniards, from whose _medalla_, we have _medal_; whose _argil_[121] is _arcilla_, from the Latin _argilla_; and to whose _cavilar_, Webster traces _cavil_; in all their derivatives from these Latin roots, _metallum_, metal--_coralium, corallium, curalium_, or _corallum_, coral--_crystallus_ or _crystallum_, crystal--_pupillus_, pupil--and _tranquillus_, tranquil--follow their own rules, and write mostly with single _l_: as, _pupilero_, a teacher; _metalico_, metalic; _corolina_ (_fem_.) coraline; _cristalino_, crystaline; _crystalizar_, crystalize; _traquilizar_, tranquilize; and _tranquilidad_, tranquility. And if we follow not ours, when or how shall the English scholar ever know why we spell as we do? For example, what can he make of the orthography of the following words, which I copy from our best dictionaries: equip', eq'uipage; wor's.h.i.+p, wor's.h.i.+pper;--peril, perilous; cavil, cavillous;[122]--libel, libellous; quarrel, quarrelous;--opal, opaline; metal, metalline;[123]--coral, coralliform; crystal, crystalform;--dial, dialist; medal, medallist;--rascal, rascalion; medal, medallion;--moral, moralist, morality; metal, metallist, metallurgy;--civil, civilize, civility; tranquil, tranquillize, tranquillity;--novel, novelism, novelist, novelize; grovel, grovelling, grovelled, groveller?

OBS. 15.--The second clause of Murray's or Walker's 5th Rule for spelling, gives only a single _l_ to each of the derivatives above named.[124] But it also treats in like manner many hundreds of words in which the _l_ must certainly be doubled. And, as neither "the Compiler," nor any of his copiers, have paid any regard to their own principle, neither their doctrine nor their practice can be of much weight either way. Yet it is important to know to what words the rule is, or is not, applicable. In considering this vexatious question about the duplication of _l_, I was at first inclined to admit that, whenever final _l_ has become single in English by dropping the second _l_ of a foreign root, the word shall resume the _ll_ in all derivatives formed from it by adding a termination beginning with a vowel; as, _beryllus, beryl, berylline_. This would, of course, double the _l_ in nearly all the derivatives from _metal, medal_, &c. But what says Custom? She constantly doubles the _l_ in most of them; but wavers in respect to some, and in a few will have it single. Hence the difficulty of drawing a line by which we may abide without censure.

_Pu'pillage_ and _pu'pillary_, with _ll_, are according to _Walker's Rhyming Dictionary_; but Johnson spells them _pu'pilage_ and _pu'pilary_, with single _l_; and Walker, in his p.r.o.nouncing Dictionary, has _pupilage_ with one _l_, and _pupillary_ with two. Again: both Johnson's and the p.r.o.nouncing Dictionary, give us _medallist_ and _metallist_ with _ll_, and are sustained by Webster and others; but Walker, in his Rhyming Dictionary, writes them _medalist_ and _metalist_, with single _l_, like _dialist, formalist, cabalist, herbalist_, and twenty other such words. Further: Webster doubles the _l_ in all the derivatives of _metal, medal, coral, axil, argil_, and _papil_; but writes it single in all those of _crystal, cavil, pupil_, and _tranquil_--except _tranquillity_.

OBS. 16.--Dr. Webster also attempts, or pretends, to put in practice the hasty proposition of Walker, to spell with single _l_ all derivatives from words ending in _l_ not under the accent. "No letter," says Walker, "seems to be more frequently doubled improperly than _l_. Why we should write _libelling, levelling, revelling_, and yet _offering, suffering, reasoning_, I am totally at a loss to determine; and, unless _l_ can give a better plea than any other letter in the alphabet, for being doubled in this situation, I must, in the style of Lucian, in his trial of the letter _T_, declare for an expulsion."--_Rhyming Dict._, p. x. This rash conception, being adopted by some men of still less caution, has wrought great mischief in our orthography. With respect to words ending in _el_, it is a good and sufficient reason for doubling the _l_, that the _e_ may otherwise be supposed servile and silent. I have therefore made this termination a general exception to the rule against doubling. Besides, a large number of these words, being derived from foreign words in which the _l_ was doubled, have a second reason for the duplication, as strong as that which has often induced these same authors to double that letter, as noticed above. Such are bordel, chapel, duel, fardel, gabel, gospel, gravel, lamel, label, libel, marvel, model, novel, parcel, quarrel, and spinel. Accordingly we find, that, in his work of expulsion, Dr. Webster has not unfrequently contradicted himself, and conformed to usage, by doubling the _l_ where he probably intended to write it single. Thus, in the words bordeller, chapellany, chapelling, gospellary, gospeller, gravelly, lamellate, lamellar, lamellarly, lamelliform, and spinellane, he has written the _l_ double, while he has grossly corrupted many other similar words by forbearing the reduplication; as, _traveler, groveling, duelist, marvelous_, and the like. In cases of such difficulty, we can never arrive at uniformity and consistency of practice, unless we resort to _principles_, and such principles as can be made intelligible to the _English_ scholar. If any one is dissatisfied with the rules and exceptions which I have laid down, let him study the subject till he can furnish the schools with better.

OBS. 17.--We have in our language a very numerous cla.s.s of adjectives ending in _able_ or _ible_, as _affable, arable, tolerable, admissible, credible, infallible_, to the number of nine hundred or more. In respect to the proper form and signification of some of these, there occurs no small difficulty. _Able_ is a common English word, the meaning of which is much better understood than its origin. Horne Tooke supposes it to have come from the Gothic noun _abal_, signifying _strength_; and consequently avers, that it "has nothing to do with the Latin adjective _habilis, fit_, or _able_, from which our etymologists erroneously derive it."--_Diversions of Purley_, Vol. ii, p. 450. This I suppose the etymologists will dispute with him. But whatever may be its true derivation, no one can well deny that _able_, as a suffix, belongs most properly, if not exclusively, to _verbs_; for most of the words formed by it, are plainly a sort of verbal adjectives. And it is evident that this author is right in supposing that English words of this termination, like the Latin verbals in _bilis_, have, or ought to have, such a signification as may justify the name which he gives them, of "_potential pa.s.sive adjectives_;" a signification in which the English and the Latin derivatives exactly correspond. Thus _dis'soluble_ or _dissolv'able_ does not mean _able to dissolve_, but _capable of being dissolved_; and _divisible_ or _dividable_ does not mean _able to divide_, but _capable of being divided_.

OBS. 18.--As to the application of this suffix to nouns, when we consider the signification of the words thus formed, its propriety may well be doubted. It is true, however, that nouns do sometimes a.s.sume something of the nature of verbs, so as to give rise to adjectives that are of a participial character; such, for instance, as _sainted, bigoted, conceited, gifted, tufted_. Again, of such as _hard-hearted, good-natured, cold-blooded_, we have an indefinite number. And perhaps, upon the same principle, the formation of such words as _actionable, companionable, exceptionable, marketable, merchantable, pasturable, treasonable_, and so forth, may be justified, if care be taken to use them in a sense a.n.a.logous to that of the real verbals. But, surely, the meaning which is commonly attached to the words _amicable, changeable, fas.h.i.+onable, favourable, peaceable, reasonable, pleasurable, seasonable, suitable_, and some others, would never be guessed from their formation. Thus, _suitable_ means _fitting_ or _suiting_, and not _able to suit_, or _capable of being suited_.

OBS. 19.--Though all words that terminate in _able_, used as a suffix, are properly reckoned derivatives, rather than compounds, and in the former cla.s.s the separate meaning of the parts united is much less regarded than in the latter; yet, in the use of words of this formation, it would be well to have some respect to the general a.n.a.logy of their signification as stated above; and not to make derivatives of the same fas.h.i.+on convey meanings so very different as do some of these. Perhaps it is from some general notion of their impropriety, that several words of this doubtful character have already become obsolete, or are gradually falling into disuse: as, _accustomable, chanceable, concordable, conusable, customable, behoovable, leisurable, medicinable, personable, powerable, razorable, shapable, semblable, vengeable, veritable_. Still, there are several others, yet currently employed, which might better perhaps, for the same reason, give place to more regular terms: as, _amicable_, for _friendly_ or _kind_; _charitable_, for _benevolent_ or _liberal_; _colourable_, for _apparent_ or _specious_; _peaceable_, for _peaceful_ or _unhostile_; _pleasurable_, for _pleasing_ or _delightful_; _profitable_, for _gainful_ or _lucrative_; _sociable_, for _social_ or _affable_; _reasonable_, for _rational_ or _just_.

OBS. 20.--In respect to the orthography of words ending in _able_ or _ible_, it is sometimes difficult to determine which of these endings ought to be preferred; as whether we ought to write _tenable_ or _tenible, reversable_ or _reversible, addable_ or _addible_. In Latin, the termination is _bilis_, and the preceding vowel is determined by the _conjugation_ to which the verb belongs. Thus, for verbs of the first conjugation, it is _a_; as, from _arare_, to plough, _arabilis, arable_, tillable. For the second conjugation, it is _i_; as, from _doc=ere_, to teach, _docibilis_, or _docilis, docible_ or _docile_, teachable. For the third conjugation, it is _i_; as, from _vend=ere_, to sell, _vendibilis, vendible_, salable. And, for the fourth conjugation, it is _i_; as, from _sepelire_, to bury, _sepelib~ilis, sep'elible_,[125] buriable. But from _solvo_ and _volvo_, of the third conjugation, we have _ubilis, uble_; as, _solubilis, sol'uble_, solvible or solvable; _volubilis, vol'uble_, rollable. Hence the English words, _rev'oluble, res'oluble, irres'oluble, dis'soluble, indis'soluble_, and _insol'uble_. Thus the Latin verbals in _bilis_, are a sufficient guide to the orthography of all such words as are traceable to them; but the mere English scholar cannot avail himself of this aid; and of this sort of words we have a much greater number than were ever known in Latin. A few we have borrowed from the French: as, _tenable, capable, preferable, convertible_; and these we write as they are written in French. But the difficulty lies chiefly in those which are of English growth. For some of them are formed according to the model of the Latin verbals in _ibilis_; as _forcible, coercible, reducible, discernible_; and others are made by simply adding the suffix _able_; as _traceable, p.r.o.nounceable, manageable, advisable, returnable_. The last are purely English; and yet they correspond in form with such as come from Latin verbals in _abilis_.

OBS. 21.--From these different modes of formation, with the choice of different roots, we have sometimes two or three words, differing in orthography and p.r.o.nunciation, but conveying the same meaning; as, _divis'ible_ and _divi'dable, des'picable_ and _despi'sable, ref'erable_ and _refer'rible, mis'cible_ and _mix'able, dis'soluble, dissol'vible_, and _dissol'vable_. Hence, too, we have some words which seem to the mere English scholar to be spelled in a very contradictory manner, though each, perhaps, obeys the law of its own derivation; as, _peaceable_ and _forcible, impierceable_ and _coercible, marriageable_ and _corrigible, damageable_ and _eligible, changeable_ and _tangible, chargeable_ and _frangible, fencible_ and _defensible, pref'erable_ and _referrible, conversable_ and _reversible, defendable_ and _descendible, amendable_ and _extendible, bendable_ and _vendible, dividable_ and _corrodible, returnable_ and _discernible, indispensable_ and _responsible, advisable_ and _fusible, respectable_ and _compatible, delectable_ and _collectible, taxable_ and _flexible_.

OBS. 22.--The American editor of the _Red Book_, to whom all these apparent inconsistencies seemed real blunders, has greatly exaggerated this difficulty in our orthography, and charged Johnson and Walker with having written all these words and many more, in this contradictory manner, "_without any apparent reason_!" He boldly avers, that, "The perpetual contradictions of the same or like words, _in all the books_, show that the authors had no distinct ideas of what is right, and what is wrong;" and ignorantly imagines, that, "The use of _ible_ rather than _able, in any case_, originated in the necessity of keeping the soft sound of _c_ and _g_, in the derivatives; and if _ible was confined_ to that use, it would be an easy and simple rule."--_Red Book_, p. 170. Hence, he proposes to write _peacible_ for _peaceable, tracible_ for _traceable, changible_ for _changeable, managible_ for _manageable_; and so for all the rest that come from words ending in _ce_ or _ge_. But, whatever advantage there might be in this, his "easy and simple rule" would work a revolution for which the world is not yet prepared. It would make _audible audable, fallible fallable, feasible feasable, terrible terrable, horrible horrable_, &c. No tyro can spell in a worse manner than this, even if he have no rule at all.

And those who do not know enough of Latin grammar to profit by what I have said in the preceding observation, may console themselves with the reflection, that, in spelling these difficult words entirely by guess, they will not miss the way more than some have done who pretended to be critics.

The rule given by John Burn, for _able_ and _ible_, is less objectionable; but it is rendered useless by the great number of its exceptions.

OBS. 23.--As most of the rules for spelling refer to the final letters of our primitive words, it may be proper for the learner to know and remember, that not all the letters of the alphabet can a.s.sume that situation, and that some of them terminate words much more frequently than others. Thus, in Walker's Rhyming Dictionary, the letter _a_ ends about 220 words; _b_, 160; _c_, 450; _d_, 1550; _e_, 7000; _f_, 140; _g_, 280; _h_, 400; _i_, 29; _j_, none; _k_, 550; _l_, 1900; _m_, 550; _n_, 3300; _o_, 200; _p_, 450; _q_, none; _r_, 2750; _s_, 3250; _t_, 3100; _u_, 14; _v_, none; _w_, 200; _x_, 100; _y_, 5000; _z_, 5. We have, then, three consonants, _j, q_, and _v_, which never end a word. And why not? With respect to _j_ and _v_, the reason is plain from their history. These letters were formerly identified with _i_ and _u_, which are not terminational letters. The vowel _i_ ends no pure English word, except that which is formed of its own capital _I_; and the few words which end with _u_ are all foreign, except _thou_ and _you_. And not only so, the letter _j_ is what was formerly called _i consonant_; and _v_ is what was called _u consonant_. But it was the initial _i_ and _u_, or the _i_ and _u_ which preceded an other vowel, and not those which followed one, that were converted into the consonants _j_ and _v_. Hence, neither of these letters ever ends any English word, or is ever doubled. Nor do they unite with other consonants before or after a vowel: except that _v_ is joined with _r_ in a few words of French origin, as _livre, manoeuvre_; or with _l_ in some Dutch names, as _Watervleit. Q_ ends no English word, because it is always followed by _u_. The French termination _que_, which is commonly retained in _pique, antique, critique, opaque, oblique, burlesque_, and _grotesque_, is equivalent to _k_; hence we write _packet, lackey, checker, risk, mask_, and _mosk_, rather than _paquet, laquey, chequer, risque, masque_, and _mosque_. And some authors write _burlesk_ and _grotesk_, preferring _k_ to _que_.

OBS. 24.--Thus we see that _j, q_, and _v_, are, for the most part, initial consonants only. Hence there is a harshness, if not an impropriety, in that syllabication which some have recently adopted, wherein they accommodate to the ear the division of such words as _maj-es-ty, proj-ect, traj-ect,--eq-ui-ty, liq-ui-date, ex-cheq-uer_. But _v_, in a similar situation, has now become familiar; as in _ev-er-y, ev-i-dence_: and it may also stand with _l_ or _r_, in the division of such words as _solv-ing_ and _serv-ing_. Of words ending in _ive_, Walker exhibits four hundred and fifty--exactly the same number that he spells with _ic_. And Horne Tooke, who derives _ive_ from the Latin _ivus_, (q. d. _vis_,) and _ic_ from the Greek [Greek: _ikos_], (q. d. [Greek: _ischus_]) both implying _power_, has well observed that there is a general correspondence of meaning between these two cla.s.ses of adjectives--both being of "a potential active signification; as _purgative, vomitive, operative_, &c.; _cathartic, emetic, energetic_, &c."--_Diversions of Purley_, Vol. ii, p. 445. I have before observed, that Tooke spelled all this latter cla.s.s of words without the final _k_; but he left it to Dr. Webster to suggest the reformation of striking the final _e_ from the former.

OBS. 25.--In Dr. Webster's "Collection of Essays and _Fugitiv Peeces_,"

published in 1790, we find, among other equally ingenious improvements of our orthography, a general omission of the final _e_ in all words ending in _ive_, or rather of all words ending in _ve_, preceded by a short vowel; as, "_primitiv, derivativ, extensiv, positiv, deserv, twelv, proov, luv, hav, giv, liv_." This mode of spelling, had it been adopted by other learned men, would not only have made _v_ a very frequent final consonant, but would have placed it in an other new and strange predicament, as being subject to reduplication. For he that will write _hav, giv_, and _liv_, must also, by a general rule of grammar, write _havving, givving_, and _livving_. And not only so, there will follow also, in the solemn style of the Bible, a change of _givest, livest, giveth_, and _liveth_, into _givvest, livvest, givveth_, and _livveth_. From all this it may appear, that a silent final _e_ is not always quite so useless a thing as some may imagine. With a levity no less remarkable, does the author of the _Red Book_ propose at once two different ways of reforming the orthography of such words as _pierceable, manageable_, and so forth; in one of which, the letter _j_ would be brought into a new position, and subjected sometimes to reduplication. "It would be a useful improvement to change this _c_ into _s_, and _g_ into _j_;" as, _piersable, manajable_, &c. "Or they might a.s.sume _i_;" as, _piercibe, managible_, &c.--_Red Book_, p. 170. Now would not this "useful improvement" give us such a word as _allejjable_? and would not one such monster be more offensive than all our present exceptions to Rule 9th? Out upon all such tampering with orthography!

OBS. 26.--If any thing could arrest the folly of innovators and dabbling reformers, it would be the history of former attempts to effect improvements similar to theirs. With this sort of history every one would do well to acquaint himself, before he proceeds to disfigure words by placing their written elements in any new predicament. If the orthography of the English language is ever reduced to greater regularity than it now exhibits, the reformation must be wrought by those who have no disposition either to exaggerate its present defects, or to undertake too much. Regard must be had to the origin, as well as to the sounds, of words. To many people, all silent letters seem superfluous; and all indirect modes of spelling, absurd. Hence, as the learner may perceive, a very large proportion of the variations and disputed points in spelling, are such as refer to the silent letters, which are retained by some writers and omitted by others. It is desirable that such as are useless and irregular should be always omitted; and such as are useful and regular always retained. The rules which I have laid down as principles of discrimination, are such as almost every reader will know to be generally true, and agreeable to present usage, though several of them have never before been printed in any grammar. Their application will strike out some letters which are often written, and retain some which are often omitted; but, if they err on either hand, I am confident they err less than any other set of rules ever yet formed for the same purpose. Walker, from whom Murray borrowed his rules for spelling, declares for an expulsion of the second _l_ from _traveller, gambolled, grovelling, equalling, cavilling_, and all similar words; seems more willing to drop an _l_ from _illness, stillness, shrillness, fellness_, and _drollness_, than to retain both in _smallness, tallness, chillness, dullness_, and _fullness_; makes it one of his orthographical aphorisms, that, "Words taken into composition often drop those letters which were superfluous in their simples; as, _Christmas, dunghil, handful_;" and, at the same time, chooses rather to restore the silent _e_ to the ten derivatives from _move_ and _prove_, from which Johnson dropped it, than to drop it from the ten similar words in which that author retained it! And not only so, he argues against the principle of his own aphorism; and says, "It is certainly to be feared that, if this pruning of our words of all the superfluous letters, as they are called, should be much farther indulged, we shall quickly antiquate our most respectable authors, and irreparably maim our language."--_Walker's Rhyming Dict._, p. xvii.

OBS. 27.--No attempt to subject our orthography to a system of phonetics, seems likely to meet with general favour, or to be free from objection, if it should. For words are not mere sounds, and in their _orthography_ more is implied than in _phonetics_, or _phonography_. Ideographic forms have, in general, the advantage of preserving the ident.i.ty, history, and lineage of words; and these are important matters in respect to which phonetic writing is very liable to be deficient. Dr. Johnson, about a century ago, observed, "There have been many schemes offered for the emendation and settlement of our orthography, which, like that of other nations, being formed by chance, or according to the fancy of the earliest writers in rude ages, was at first very various and uncertain, and [is] as yet sufficiently irregular. Of these reformers some have endeavoured to accommodate orthography better to the p.r.o.nunciation, without considering that this is to measure by a shadow, to take that for a model or standard which is changing while they apply it. Others, less absurdly indeed, but with equal unlikelihood of success, have endeavoured to proportion the number of letters to that of sounds, that every sound may have its own character, and every character a single sound. Such would be the orthography of a new language to be formed by a synod of grammarians upon principles of science.

But who can hope to prevail on nations to change their practice, and make all their old books useless? or what advantage would a new orthography procure equivalent to the confusion and perplexity of such an alteration?"--_Johnson's Grammar before Quarto Dict._, p. 4.

OBS. 28.--Among these reformers of our alphabet and orthography, of whose schemes he gives examples, the Doctor mentions, first, "_Sir Thomas Smith_, secretary of state to Queen Elizabeth, a man of real learning, and much practised in grammatical disquisitions;" who died in 1597;--next, "_Dr.

Gill_, the celebrated master of St. Paul's School in London;" who died in 1635;--then, "_Charles Butler_, a man who did not want an understanding which might have qualified him for better employment;" who died in 1647;--and, lastly, "_Bishop Wilkins_, of Chester, a learned and ingenious critic, who is said to have proposed his scheme, without expecting to be followed;" he died in 1672.

OBS. 29.--From this time, there was, so far as I know, no noticeable renewal of such efforts, till about the year 1790, when, as it is shown above on page 134 of my Introduction, _Dr. Webster_, (who was then only "_Noah Webster, Jun._, attorney at law,") attempted to spell all words as they are spoken, without revising the alphabet--a scheme which his subsequent experience before many years led him to abandon. Such a reformation was again attempted, about forty years after, by an other young lawyer, the late lamented _Thomas S. Grimke_, of South Carolina, but with no more success. More recently, phonography, or phonetic writing, has been revived, and to some extent spread, by the publications of _Isaac Pitman_, of Bath, England, and of _Dr. Andrew Comstock_, of Philadelphia. The system of the former has been made known in America chiefly by the lectures and other efforts of _Andrews and Boyle_, of _Dr. Stone_, a citizen of Boston, and of _E. Webster_, a publisher in Philadelphia.

OBS. 30.--The p.r.o.nunciation of words being evidently as deficient in regularity, in uniformity, and in stability, as is their orthography, if not more so, cannot be conveniently made the measure of their written expression.

Concerning the principle of writing and printing by sounds alone, a recent writer delivers his opinion thus: "Let me here observe, as something not remote from our subject, but, on the contrary, directly bearing upon it, that I can conceive no [other] method of so effectually defacing and barbarizing our English tongue, no [other] scheme that would go so far to empty it, practically at least and for us, of all the h.o.a.rded wit, wisdom, imagination, and history which it contains, to cut the vital nerve which connects its present with the past, as the introduction of the scheme of 'phonetic spelling,' which some have lately been zealously advocating among us; the principle of which is, that all words should be spelt according as they are sounded, that the writing should be, in every case, subordinated to the speaking. The tacit a.s.sumption that it ought so to be, is the pervading error running through the whole system."--_R. C. Trench, on the Study of Words_, p. 177.

OBS. 31.--The phonographic system of stenography, tachygraphy, or short-hand writing, is, I incline to believe, a very great improvement upon the earlier methods. It is perhaps the most reliable mode of taking down speeches, sermons, or arguments, during their delivery, and reporting them for the press; though I cannot p.r.o.nounce upon this from any experience of my own in the _practice_ of the art. And it seems highly probable, if it has not been fully proved, that children may at first be taught to read more readily, and with better articulation, from phonetic print, or _phonotypy_, as it has been called, than from books that exhibit words in their current or established orthography. But still it is questionable whether it is not best for them to learn each word at first by its peculiar or ideographic form--the form in which they must ultimately learn to read it, and which indeed const.i.tutes its only _orthography_.

IMPROPRIETIES FOR CORRECTION.

ERRORS IN SPELLING.

UNDER RULE I.--OF FINAL F, L, OR S.

"He wil observe the moral law, in hiz conduct."--_Webster's Essays_, p.

320.

[FORMULES--1. Not proper, because the word "_wil_" is here spelled with one _l_. But, according to Rule 1st, "Monosyllables ending in _f, l_, or _s_, preceded by a single vowel, double the final consonant." Therefore, this _l_ should be doubled; thus, _will_.

2. Not proper again, because the word "_hiz_" is here spelled with _z_.

But, according to the exceptions to Rule 1st, "The words _as, gas, has, was, yes, his_, &c., are written with single _s_." Therefore, this _z_ should be _s_; thus, _his_.]

"A clif is a steep bank, or a precipitous rock."--See _Rhyming Dict._ "A needy man's budget is ful of schemes."--_Old Adage_. "Few large publications in this country wil pay a printer."--_Noah Webster's Essays_, p. x. "I shal, with cheerfulness, resign my other papers to oblivion."--_Ib._, p. x. "The proposition waz suspended til the next session of the legislature."--_Ib._, p. 362. "Tenants for life wil make the most of lands for themselves."--_Ib._, p. 366. "While every thing iz left to lazy negroes, a state wil never be wel cultivated."--_Ib._, p. 367. "The heirs of the original proprietors stil hold the soil."--_Ib._, p. 349. "Say my annual profit on money loaned shal be six per cent."--_Ib._, p. 308. "No man would submit to the drudgery of business, if he could make money az fast by lying stil."--_Ib._, p. 310. "A man may az wel feed himself with a bodkin, az with a knife of the present fas.h.i.+on."--_Ib._, p. 400. "The clothes wil be ill washed, the food wil be badly cooked; and you wil be ashamed of your wife, if she iz not ashamed of herself."--_Ib._, p. 404.

"He wil submit to the laws of the state, while he iz a member of it."--_Ib._, p. 320. "But wil our sage writers on law forever think by tradition?"--_Ib._, p. 318. "Some stil retain a sovereign power in their territories."--_Ib._, p. 298. "They sel images, prayers, the sound of bels, remission of sins, &c."--_Perkins's Theology_, p. 401. "And the law had sacrifices offered every day for the sins of al the people."--_Ib._, p.

406. "Then it may please the Lord, they shal find it to be a restorative."--_Ib._, p. 420. "Perdition is repentance put of til a future day."--_Old Maxim_. "The angels of G.o.d, which wil good and cannot wil evil, have nevertheless perfect liberty of wil."--_Perkins's Theology_, p. 716.

"Secondly, this doctrine cuts off the excuse of al sin."--_Ib._, p. 717.

"Knel, the sound of a bell rung at a funeral."--_Johnson_ and _Walker_.

"If gold with dros or grain with chaf you find, Select--and leave the chaf and dros behind."--_Author_.

UNDER RULE II.--OF OTHER FINALS.

"The mobb hath many heads, but no brains."--_Old Maxim_.

[FORMULE.--Not proper, because the word "_mobb_" is here spelled with double _b_. But, according to Rule 2d, "Words ending in any other consonant than _f, l_, or _s_, do not double the final letter." Therefore, this _b_ should be single: thus, _mob_.]

"Clamm, to clog with any glutinous or viscous matter."--_Johnson's Dict._ "Whurr, to p.r.o.nounce the letter _r_ with too much force."--_Ib._ "Flipp, a mixed liquor, consisting of beer and spirits sweetened."--_Ib._ "Glynn, a hollow between two mountains, a glen."--_Churchill's Grammar_, p. 22.

"Lamm, to beat soundly with a cudgel or bludgeon."--_Walker's Dict._ "Bunn, a small cake, a simnel, a kind of sweet bread."--See _ib._ "Brunett, a woman with a brown complexion."--_Ib._ and _Johnson's Dict._ "Wad'sett, an ancient tenure or lease of land in the Highlands of Scotland."--_Webster's Dict._ "To _dodd_ sheep, is to cut the wool away about their tails."--_Ib._ "_In aliquem arietare_, CIC. To run full but at one."--_Walker's Particles_, p. 95. "Neither your policy nor your temper would permitt you to kill me."--_Philological Museum_, Vol. i, p. 427. "And admitt none but his own offspring to fulfill them."--_Ib._, i, 437. "The summ of all this Dispute is, that some make them Participles," &c.--_Johnson's Gram._ _Com._, p. 352. "As, the _whistling_ of winds, the _buz_ and _hum_ of insects, the _hiss_ of serpents, the _crash_ of falling timber."--_Blair's Rhet._, p. 129; _Adam's Lat. Gram._, p. 247; _Gould's_, 238. "Vann, to winnow, or a fan for winnowing."--_Walker's Rhyming Dict._ "Creatures that buz, are very commonly such as will sting."--_Author_ "Begg, buy, or borrow; b.u.t.t beware how you find."--_Id._ "It is better to have a house to lett, than a house to gett."--_Id._ "Let not your tongue cutt your throat."--_Old Precept_. "A little witt will save a fortunate man."--_Old Adage_. "There is many a slipp 'twixt the cup and the lipp."--_Id._ "Mothers' darlings make but milksopp heroes."--_Id._ "One eye-witness is worth tenn hearsays."--_Id._

"The judge shall jobb, the bishop bite the town, And mighty dukes pack cards for half a crown."--POPE: _in Joh. Dict., w. Pack._

UNDER RULE III.--OF DOUBLING.

"Friz, to curl; frized, curled; frizing, curling."--_Webster's Dict._, 8vo.

Ed. of 1829.

[FORMULE--Not proper, because the words "_frized_" and "_frizing_" are here spelled with the single _z_, of their primitive _friz_. But, according to Rule 3d, "Monosyllables, and words accented on the last syllable, when they end with a single consonant preceded by a single vowel, double their final consonant before an additional syllable that begins with a vowel."

Therefore, this _z_ should be doubled; thus, _frizzed, frizzing_.]

"The commercial interests served to foster the principles of Whigism."--_Payne's Geog._, Vol. ii, p. 511. "Their extreme indolence shuned every species of labour."--_Robertson's Amer._, Vol. i, p. 341. "In poverty and stripedness they attend their little meetings."--_The Friend_, Vol. vii, p. 256. "In guiding and controling[126] the power you have thus obtained."--_Abbott's Teacher_, p. 15. "I began, Thou beganest, He began; We began, You began, They began."--_Alex. Murray's Gram._, p. 92. "Why does _began_ change its ending; as, I began, Thou beganest?"--_Ib._, p. 93.