Co ticltu%an.
Cs
0 0 1
We bslev, den, dal we furnij in dsz pajez ds desideratum defend in dg
fdloiij pasej, liwiq we liav ccstracted from a revii ov lluunbolts Cozmos,
in dc Edinburo Ttsivj for Jamieri 1848, nr. 175, p. 226, and adopted
az st moto :
v\ e must enter sr protest, we fer an unavalip wun, agénst de supjnnes hwie suferz
doz invdliiabd monuments, de un-rit’n laijgwejez ov de ert, tin periJ wid a mpiditi verli
incresiij, widit wun rajunal and wel-conserted efurt tm sav dem in de onli mod in
liwig it can be dun efectiiali, namli, bj redifsip dem tin rjtiij acordiij tm dar egzâci
nativ jgronunsiafun, trat de medium ov a fcuroli wel-considerd and dijésted Fonetic
alfabet. Abdt sicsti (/3) wel-goz’n, ezili rit’n, and unecwivocal caracterz, completli
egzempliijd in dar ixs bj pasejez from gad rjterz in de prinsipal FLropean and estern
iapgwejez, wild satisfj everi wont, widdt goir) intm imprdcticab’l njsetiz ; and we
ernestli recomend de construe]un and promulgajun ov a manual ov dis cjnd, for de us
ov travelerz, vaejerz, and colonists, az a mater ov presii) nrjensi, tm de considerajun ov
filolojists, etnolojists, and jeograferz, in dar respéctiv Sosjetiz asémb’ld.”
cIe rpter ov âe abuv pasej woz aewanted wid ds fonetic Iyglif alfabet
liEi* egzibited, but onli in a veri imperfect and elementeri form ; yet ev’u
in dut stat he sez ov it, in a not upended tin ds abuv statment, dat it—
“ wad liav considerab 1 merit, wer it not funded on an esenfali IrjgliJ, ilisted ov a
cosmopolitan vu ov de vvel smidz, az reprezented bj Idropean leterz, and darfor Jmr
tiu be rejected bj everi foren filolojist,” and dat, “ enlqrjd tin sut de écsijensiz ov de
cas, [itj wad be préférai)4 fer témporeri us tm de prezent no-sistem in liwig eg traveler
in biz djeri, and eg mi/uneri in formai gramer and diejuneri, confondz and fer ever
mq,rz, az semz gad in hiz on jz, de pronunsiajun lie preténdz tm fies.
cIe objecjnn lier razd,—not tin ds tsori ov sr Alfabet, but soll! tm
de fermz hwiq we hav qoz’n tm reprezént tnt vselz,—we must consider
ov slit importons. He tab’lz on pajez 216 and 217, wil enab’l de reder
tiu ss h is lit’l trmt dar iz in ds pdea dat serten Latin leterz etr apro-
priated tm serten svmdz az Uropsan leterz. We consider dg IrjgliJ, az
a liviij laijgwej, spoe’n az dar nativ tuij bp meni mor pep’l dan ever
spoc Latin, posésiij a lqrj bteratur, an snermus vocalmleri, (compârd tm
hwiq ddt ov de clasical Latin siijcs elmost intm insignificans,) and haviij
wun ov ds most complet eoleejun ov consonants hwiq iz tm bs fond in eni
wun Uropean laijgwej, îiaviij meni vselz and consonants hwiq de Latin
laijgwej iz totali unab’l tm reprezént or tm sujést ; —wg consider dat ds
fonetic andlojiz ov suq a laijgwej (pr mor wurdi ov considerajun dan doz
73. FTr etnical alfabet contânz 55 sjnz (p. 122), and if we reject az unneseseri de sics
compsndz i, v, y, g, ç,j, we hav 49 simbulz az sufijent fer etnical pnrpusez, ecsclmsiv
ov de streijt’nd leterz, liwig dm not recwjr seperet simbulz, az de variajun ov roman
and italic tjp iz sufijent tm indieat dar prezens.
20