MORE than fifty years ago, while living in the city of New York, and at work in company with a man who was my senior in age, and whom I am wiling to acknowledge as my superior both in mechanical skill and in literary acquirements, in a conversation in regard to the spelling of some word or words, he made a remark to the effect that Dr. Noah Webster made great improvements in spelling the English language, but that in his opinion he (Webster) did not go far enough. I have thought much on that subject since that time, and have concluded that the remark was a wise one, and that the imperfection in Dr. Webster's system was in the use of silent letters -- letters whose sound was not used in pronouncing the words, and which, if their sound was used would in many cases make the words both unpronouncable and nonsensical. Perhaps the word tho is as good an illustration as there is. This word commonly spelled with the letters t h o u g h really spells tho-ug-h which will not be recognized as an English word and I doubt if it can found in any written language; but the letters t h o spell it thoroughly from the beginning to the end, with less than half the space occupied by word as it is usually spelled. In most words in which two letters of the same name are placed together one is all that is usually used in pronouncing the word. The word follow is well spelled by the letters f o l o, there being no sound of w in it. I think the word there as it is usually pronounced is more correctly spelled by the letters t h a r, the letters t h e r e really spell the-re which is not an English word. Many of the words ending with an e the e is silent as in amiable, which is sufficiently spelled by the letters a m i a b l the common word really spells a-mi-a-ble. Perhaps the above examples are enough to illustrate my idea of the more easy spelling which I commend.
I have made several experiments during the progress of this work, and am of the opinion that it would have required five or six pages more to have printed the same thoughts, if the common spelling had been used.
There is another way by which words may be shortened, but which I have not used in this book, and that is, as far as practicabl using only one letter to spell a word, as is now done in the words A and I. To illustrate, the letter b will sufficiently spell the words be or bee; the letter c will spell the words see or sea; the letter D would spell the name of the river Dee; the letter g would be understood if spoken to the average Yankee oxen, as well as I would be comprehended by the farmers themselves; and so on among the letters of the slphabet the letters j l o p t and u could be made to spell words; and that by this use further space would be saved in presenting thoughts to the mind.
In order give the various sounds of the vowels, which are now sometimes represented by accented letters, I suggest the invention of some ten or a dozen new letters, each with a shape and name of its own corresponding to the sound it is desired to express: the a as in the word fate might remain as it now is, while the a as in far could be substituted by a different letter with a different name, and the a as in fall could have a different letterr with a different name; and so on through the six vowel letters. In that way the different sounds which are given to the same letter would be more easily recognized.
I will venture another suggestion which, I think would be an improvement on the present practice, that is to print school-books, books for general reading, newspapers, etc., in a style of type more nearly resembling the chirography of a good plain writer. By this change children would not be under the necessity of learning another alphabet when they desired to read manuscript or learn to write; and they would be likely to acquire a plainer hand-writing.
If a majority of the changes which I have mentioned shall ever be adopted by the scholars of our nation, would we be justified in dropping "English" as the name of our language, and style it the "American Saxon" language?