Democratic Sentinel, Volume 13, Number 52, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 17 January 1890 — Spelling-Reform Redivius. [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

Spelling-Reform Redivius.

PHE people who would amend cumbrous orthography and substitute for it something of a simpler character are again coming to the front. Instead, however, of en -

deavoring to secure the adoption of a phonetic alphabet, in which each letter would have but one sound, and each sound be represented by one letter only, the effort is now directed toward the adoption of a few definite, easily learned, and generally applicable rules for the dropping of superfluous letters. The rules suggested are as follows: 1. Drop ue at the end of words like dialogue, catalogue, eti., where the preceding vowel is short- Thus spell Uemagotr. epilog, synagog. etc. When the preceding v. wel is long, as in pro ogue. vogue, disembogue, retain linal letters as at present. 2. It p ilnal e in such woids as definite, infinite, tavorite, etc., when the p eceding vuwel is short. Thus spell opposit. preterit, hypocrit. reouisit, etc. When the nrecedinr vowel is long, as in polite, finite, unite, etc., retain present forms unchanged. 3. Drop final te. in words like ouartette. coquette, cigarette, etc. Thus spell cigarot. roset. epaulet, vedet, gazet, etc. 4. Drop final rne in words like pro- ; ramme. Thus SDell program, orifiam, gram. etc. 6. Change ph to "f in words like phantom, telegraph, phase, etc. Thus spell alfabet. paragra'. fllosofy, fotogra', etc. (>. Substitute « for the diphthongs ce and m when they have the sound of that letter. Thm spell eolian, esthetic, diarrhoa, subpena. esolagus, atheneum, etc. These rules, though few in number, would, if adopted in our writing and printing, save an appreciable percentage of the labor now involved. They have the sanction of the highest scholarship in the United States and England, including the teachers of philology |in our foremost educational institutions. They have been commended by leading editors and writers, and there is nothing against their adoption except the disinclination to change. Yet their use would in a few months become so habitual that everyone would wonder why they had not been adopted sooner. It is proposed that these rules shall be adopted in the newspapers of the country at an early date, when the eyes of reading people would soon become educated to the new appearance of the words, and whence their use would quickly extend to our books. This would be in the direction of the injunction of Noah Webster, that “the tendency of our language toward simplicity should he sedulously encouraged.” The sooner they are adopted the better. —C hicago Ledger .