AUTHOR'S ADDRESS TO THE TEACHERS OF THE

UNITED STATES.

::0000:

Gentlemen,

BEFORE I would solicit your patronage, I was determined to consult some of the most learned men of our country, besides many others of sound judgment, and well acquainted with the subject of my inquiry; and finding their ideas, very generally, coincide with my own, I feel myself warranted to assert, there cannot be any material, much less violent change, made in either the orthoepy or the orthography of the English language, as it now stands in Walker's Pronouncing Dictionary: at least, under a very considerable flux of time. On this rational ground, I composed my Nomenclature, which I now present you for the use of your pupils; presuming you will find it the most accurate work of the kind ex tant. After my Spelling Book, it will be found perfectly sufficient to make complete pronouncers and spellers in all the current words of our native speech-an invaluable acquisition in youth; and, if taken together, they will form a sure introduction to the foregoing celebrated work of Mr. Walker's, on the principles, the pronunci ation, and the orthography, of our language.

:

There are many reasons against any sudden innovation on the present improved state of our mother tongue, and particularly, the consideration of the extent to which it is now spoken and culti vated this circumstance, of itself, must proportionably retard, and eventually resist, every effort to change its established form. For, were the alteration material, and at the same time, not universal, the language would soon run into dialects; which, in process of time, would become so very different, as to produce a noble addition to the diversified and numerous progeny of Babel..

Again, can it appear less than preposterous to suppose, that the literary body of North America, would implicitly submit their judgements to the decisions of the same class of men in Great Britain; and that too without having been previously and fairly consulted on a business, equally interesting to both parties? If we reverse the case, it must look still more preposterous, as the English would consider themselves as having a prior right. Would not national prejudice defeat a negociation on so delicate a subject, sup

posing literary enthusiasm capable of bringing it to pass? From the little I know of my own species, I candidly think it would.

But let us suppose the most qualified scholars, on both sides the Atlantic, were convoked for this important occasion, it is scarcely probable they would at all agree, even in the very first step of the reformation, viz. the redundancy, and the deficiency, of our Alphabet. Would they, think you, ever arrive at unanimity in applying a remedy to this source of orthoepical anomalies? When I consider the difficulty of the investigation, acknowledged by philoso phical grammarians in all ages; the power of early habits, and the tenacity with which we hold to them; and probably, what is more obstructive than all the rest-the latent pride of poor human nature-I confess, it seems to me much beyond the line of probability to expect it.

By way of elucidating what would be likely to occur in discussing this primary matter, I shall refer you to the Reverend Mr. Abner Kneeland's Specimen of an American Pronouncing Spelling Book, printed in Philadelphia; and though I give that gentleman full credit for his acumen and ingenuity, yet, I question, if half a dozen, out of a large convocation, could be found to adopt his scheme and so, perhaps, of any other whatever. In addition to what I have already stated, still numerous cases of disagreement would happen, when they came to adapt these elements to the pronunciation and spelling of every word, in our extensive copia verborum. An Herculean task, even under the most favourable suppositions; and which no person can fairly appreciate, who has not drudged, a good deal, in words.

I am well aware that teachers, possessing extensive acquirements, and long experience, will see all I can say, at a single glance. It is not necessary to put such persons on their guard against countenancing impracticable plans, in any department of learning. But among our wide-spread population, there are a great many youth of both sexes, just entering the profession, whom I am very anxious to caution and excite, believing that when they have studied the matter sufficiently, they will not support the visionary scheme of suddenly adopting a perfect alphabet, effecting thereby a complete coincidence between the orthoepy and orthography of our language: this they will discountenance for the best of all possible reasons-its utter impracticability in this way. Who would contribute to a man's making apparatus to waft himself to the lightclad inhabitants of the moon; or assist in fitting out a missionary to the darksome Plutonian regions of our earth!!!

In short, I can regard it in no better light, if attempted in this

S2

forced manner, than a fanciful picture; a mere creature of the imagination, which experience has never tested. If it should do so, at any future period, as we live in an age of stupendous undertakings, I fear it will be found, like many an airy hypothesis, to rest on an unsubstantial foundation; and "like the baseless fabrick of a vision, will utterly vanish, and leave not a wreck behind!"

I am fully of opinion, the notion of effecting it, in this mushroom style. would be given up altogether, if we considered, that language was not made, as it were a priori, by philosophers, for the use of the people; but, that language actually coexisted with the people in their rudest state, was enlarged, and had its anomalies lessened, as it were a posteriori, by philosophers, who refined upon it, from age to age, as the increasing intelligence and refinement of the people, would allow them: this, I conceive, is pretty near the truth of the matter; and, if I mistake not, admits clear historical proof.— But what eye, accustomed to our present harmonious type, could bear the uncouth appearance of these new letters, as exhibited in Mr. Kneeland's pamphlet? It is driving us back to the semi-barbarous days of our ancestors, when there was an awkward mixture of the Roman and Saxon characters; which would be worse than reviving the old black letter, because that had, at least, uniformity to recommend it.

There is one very weighty reason which, I presume, those inventive gentlemen have not duly considered. Have they ever thought, that if any one of their schemes were suddenly carried to its ne plus ultra, it would very soon leave the present literal language a complete dead letter? There would then be an absolute necessity for transcribing all the rolls, &c. in the great archives of the British empire, to say nothing of our own; of reprinting the valua ble production of ages, in every department of science; and thus revolutionizing the entire literary system of things! Have they ever turned over in their minds the almost incalculable expense, and never ending labour, of all this? and the dire confusion it must produce, till things got perfectly settled again, should that ever be possible? They had better propose to us to level the Andes, and dry up the sources of the Amazon, and La Plata!!! Tru ly, from the most dispassionate view I can take of the thing, it seems to me altogether Quixotic; that it must have sprung from an overweening desire for philosophical exactness---perhaps, not possible in this case, at least, in this way; that, being opposed to the usual course of the nature of things, it is quite chimerical; and consequently, it should be rejected, as incongruous, by every ra tional mind.

We will not honour it with the name of a novel invention, even as it regards modern times; for the idea is not a new one. The Italians may be justly considered as the first revivers of literature, after a long night of mental darkness throughout Europe. Such a scheme was proposed and enforced in their country, about the time of Leo X., by men of great abilities, yet it did not succeed: and though that language has about thirty elementary sounds, it is obliged to be contented with only twenty two characters to represent them. The French, particularly from the time of Cardinal Richlieu, through the age of Louis the Fourteenth, made great efforts to refine their language; and no doubt, they greatly improved it: but they likewise were without a perfect alphabet, making the best use they could of their twenty five letters. If I do not greatly err, they are, after all, worse off than ourselves, as it respects the agreement between their pronunciation and spelling, as their orthoepy is very delicate.

It would not be a difficult matter to enumerate instances of other modern languages under the same predicament; but it would extend my address beyond due limits: I shall, therefore, content myself with adverting a little to ancient times. The Greek is said to be the nonpareil of languages; but notwithstanding the mighty encomiums bestowed on it, I am persuaded it never had a perfect alphabet; and consequently, it was subject to orthoepical anomalies. Were its pronunciation now actually known, as spoken in the days of Pericles or Demosthenes, how forcibly would it strike the classical ear, that its twenty four characters were inadequate to depict its oral elements, without even taking into account its reputed peculiar delicacies. In reality---Imperfection seems indelibly stamped upon every thing sublunary!--and I know not why we should make language an exception.

Thus, gentlemen, I have finished my comment upon what I call-building castles in the air. I shall now descend to terra firma, and try to find a surer foundation, upon which we may erect something permanent for the good of society. Certainly a man should never pull down, but with the laudable purpose of building a better fabrick.

It may be fairly asked, what then are we to do? Must we give up all improvement, through fear of innovation? Shall we reject any further refinement of the language, lest it should be attended with insuperable difficulties, and put us to much expense and trouble? No-by no means. That is not what I have suggested. My doctrine leaves room for every rational, and consequently, possible

improvement. I do not so much oppose the idea of the languages ever arriving at perfection, as the insufficient, because unnatural methods, which some persons would have us take to effect it. What people will receive the self-constituted scheme of any man! except, indeed, it carries an overwhelming conviction of its practical superiority to every thing else; for in that case, it ought to be received. What I want to inculcate, as the only rational mode of procedure, is, that every change for the better, be gradually introduced, so as to bring the language eventually as near to perfection, as its structure and established anomalies will permit: and should perfection be found finally possible, it must rejoice every liberal mind. There is no feasible way to bring this about, but through the proper mediums; and it must be done without violence or confusion, in order to render it universally and permanently effectual, at any future period. This is a mode of treating the business, which may be substantiated by the history of man. I will now describe what I have termed-proper mediums.

To succeed in this very laudable purpose, allow me to say, nothing can possibly be more conducive, than that every instructer of the language should assiduously qualify himself to teach it, as ought to be taught, to the rising generation. By this means, we should, ere long, have the publick prepared to receive every real improvement, that genius and erudition may wish, from time to time, to introduce. Every person of information knows, that, when polished by society, it is to those happy men of genius and learn ing united, language owes its extension and improvement: and certainly it is to them we should naturally look for its further progress towards perfection. Were I permitted to assume the mentor to my young countrymen, of the responsible profession of tutors, I would say:-Above all other things, my young friends, study your native tongue, and make yourselves complete masters of its pronunciation and orthography, its grammatical structure and elegancies, both in prose and verse: for you are, indeed, the most effectual harbingers, when thus fitted, to usher in those master spirits, whose efforts then might bring this great desideratum partly, if not entirely, to pass.

The philological works of Mr. John Walker, should be well digested by every preceptor, literary character, and gentleman, wherever the English tongue is spoken. His writings are an ample fund of sound criticism, which will abundantly supply us with the best means of removing the anomalies, and filling up their places with the proper analogies of the language, so as to establish consistency between the ear and the eye. If, in addition to the