is Darby, Leveson-Gower becomes Loosun-Gore, Hertford is Hartford, and Albany is spoken so that the first syllable shall rhyme with shall instead of with hall, as with us. I hesitate to say that Cholmondeley is called Chumley, and that Beauchamp is Beecham, as everyone knows these eccentricities; yet they are the most remarkable of all the liberties the English take with their language. You may say Balmor'al and Trafalgar', and you must chop the following names very short: Ludget, Ho-b'n, South-uk, and Merry bun, whenever you wish to say Ludgate, Holborn, Southwark, and Marylebone. I have heard the Prince call his own house Mobrer House, though we call it Marlborough House.

Note also Magdalen which is Maudlin, Worcester which is Wooster, Leicester which is Lester, Chichester which is Chester, pass and fast, which are paas and faast, and so on.

See the article on Phonology in the Appendix to "Principles of English Grammar" by Professor George R. Carpenter (The Macmillan Company), for a full discussion of the vowel differences affecting pronunciation in different parts of the United States.

Benjamin Franklin, forever famous for his practical common-sense, held that our alphabet should be rectified, and stated that in his belief persons who spell well in our present mode might perfectly well in a week's writing get over the difficulties resulting from such reformation. Franklin put the case accurately. It is our alphabet more truly than our spelling which needs to be corrected; for with a satisfactory alphabet, spelling would eventually take care of itself, becoming phonetic.

It has been claimed that according to our present method the word scissors might be spelled in 58,365,440 ways and in each follow the analogy of other accepted words. No further comment is needed on the imperfection of the present alphabet.

If diacritics are to be used at all, the dictionaries should all employ the same system. At present, the child who understands Webster's system is hopelessly puzzled over the Standard's or the Century's. But let us hope that diacritics may soon be a thing of the past. For the philological societies of England and of the United States both endorse a scientific alphabet for marking pronunciation; and it is doubtless only a question of time until we shall come also to adopt in all written language the scientific phonetic alphabet demanded now by most great English scholars.

The scientific alphabet adopted by the American Philological Associ

ation has been endorsed by the English scholarship of two continents.

Its

most important feature is the use of three new characters, properly named, to represent three of the sounds which have thus far run around begging shelter, now here and now there, with one or another of the five overworked vowels, a, e, i, o, and u.

There are eight vowel sounds common to English and to the Latin, French, Italian, Spanish, German, and Scandinavian tongues. At present English stands alone and opposed to all these in the use of certain letters and sounds which are common to all. The eight sounds are found

NOTE: I (ah + ee) and u ( 1 + ew) are omitted, being in fact, diphthongs.

The illogical pairing, into long and short, of certain vowels which never belonged together, has prevented the ear training in regard to English which should be a natural part of learning to read and spell. It would be well for all teachers to practice the following lists of properly paired syllables until they see clearly that these form a natural series of sounds, passing from the more open to the more closed.

NOTE: In practicing the above exercises, omit the syllables in parenthesis.

The test as to proper pairing of vowels is made by sounding the short vowel and then prolonging it, or by pronouncing the long vowel twice, the second time with a short and jerky impulse of voice.

The three new characters which are suggested by the American Philological Association, in order to make our alphabet satisfactory in regard to its vowels, are as follows:

The use of these three new characters would make so little change upon

the printed page that no reader would be thereby embarrassed.

Every teacher should make a thoro study of the scientific alphabet recommended by the American Philological Association, and should either be ready to help on its adoption, or be able to state intelligently why he can not do so. Spelling reform has been delayed by the rank and file of teachers, who were not acquainted with the fundamental truth of the question. But the united judgment of our greatest philologists and professors of language will in the end prevail. Every teacher should study this subject with a mind open to conviction, even tho weight of argument make havoc with his own habits and long held theories. It would be well that no diacritics at all should be taught for a dozen years, in order that children and teachers might then together approach this tremendous subject with unbiased judgment.

The State Teachers' Associations of Illinois and of Wisconsin in December, 1902, passed resolutions favoring a reformation in spelling and a universal system of key-notation for indicating pronunciation. These two great state associations also appointed committees and voted certain moneys to further the cause of simplified spelling.

Every progressive teacher should get and read (1) Circular of Information Number 8, 1893, published by the Bureau of Eduation, Washington, which sets forth what professors of philology say of this subject; (2) Our Accursed Spelling," published by E. O. Vaile, Oak Park, or Chicago, Illinois, price, 25 cents; (3) "The Scientific Alphabet," price, 20 cents, and other leaflets explanatory of a scientific mode of spelling English, published by Funk & Wagnalls, 30 Lafayette Place, New York City; (4) a pamphlet sent on application, "The Amelioration of Our Spelling," by Professor Calvin Thomas of the Department of Modern Languages, Columbia University, New York City. See also, if possible, Professor T. B. Lounsbury's chapters on this subject ("History of the English Language"), and remember that here a world-acknowledged authority is speaking.

cited:

Here are a few words from the pamphlet of Professor Thomas, above

During the last hundred and fifty years we have become a race of dictionary worshipers. We need to claim the natural right of every living language to grow and change to suit the convenience of those who use it. This right

belongs to the written language no less than to the spoken. We have the same right to make usage that Steele and Addison and Doctor Johnson had; and there is just as much merit in making usage as in following it. Spelling was made for man, and a change of spelling is no more an attack upon literature than an improved musical notation, if we could invent one, would be an assault upon music and an insult to the memory of Beethoven. Shakspere had no Unabridged to consult and he spelt very much as the spirit moved him; yet literature can hardly be said to have languished in his hands. Many people imagine that our standard was created long ago by the poets and men of letters. Scholars know that this is not so; that it was created rather by London printers, beginning with those of Caxton, who were Dutchmen unacquainted with English. It is time for us to set deliberately about the reconquest of our liberties.

The following eminent philological scholars were members of the American Spelling Reform Association when the scientific alphabet was evolved and adopted :- Samuel S. Haldeman, LL.D. (University of Pennsylvania); William D. Whitney, LL.D. (Yale), editor-in-chief of the Century dictionary; Francis A. March, LL.D. (Lafayette), ex-President of the American Philological Association, President of the American Spelling Reform Association; C. H. Toy, D.D. (Harvard); F. Max Müller, LL.D.; A. H. Sayce, LL.D. (Oxford); James A. H. Murray, LL.D. (Oxford), editor-in-chief of the new Oxford dictionary; W. W. Skeat, Litt.D. (Cambridge), the famous etymologist; Hon. W. T. Harris, LL.D. (United States Commissioner of Education); F. A. P. Barnard, LL.D. (former President of Columbia College); Thomas R. Price, LL.D. (Columbia); Charles P. G. Scott, Ph.D., member of editorial staff of the Century dictionary, editor of department of etymology, and editor-inchief of the New Worcester; Melvil Dewey, Secretary of the University of the State of New York; F. J. Child, Ph.D. (Harvard).

CHAPTER XV Page 123 A readable chapter upon colloquial, or conversational, English will be found in "Our English," by Professor Adams Sherman Hill. I quote one paragraph:

To a ready talker clever things occur while he is talking, and not on the staircase when the conversation is over. His wits are always and altogether at his command; what he knows-fact, argument, anecdote, illustration - is at his tongue's end; what he feels he feels promptly and can express at once. He never argues, never wrangles, never stagnates. He never tells a long story, or