Greek
alphabet, although not originally meant to express a European tongue at
all, expresses the Greek language well.

s. 162. But it was not from the Greek that our own alphabet was immediately
derived; although ultimately it is referable to the same source as the
Greek, viz., the Phoenician.

It was the _Roman_ alphabet which served as the basis to the English.

And it is in the changes which the Phoenician alphabet underwent in being
accommodated to the Latin language that we must investigate the chief
peculiarities of the present alphabet and orthography of Great Britain and
America.

Now respecting the Roman alphabet, we must remember that it was _not_ taken
_directly_ from the Phoenician; in this important point differing from the
Greek.

Nor yet was it taken, _in the first instance_, from the Greek.

It had a _double_ origin.

The operation of the principles indicated in s. 161 was a work of the time;
and hence the older and more unmodified Greek alphabet approached in
character its Phoenician prototype much more than the later, or modified.
As may be seen, by comparing the previous alphabets with the common
alphabets of the Greek Grammar, the letters 6 and 19 occur in the earlier,
whilst they are missing in the later, modes of writing. On the other hand,
the _old_ alphabet has no such signs as [phi], [chi], [upsilon], [omega],
[psi], and [xi].

Such being the case, it is easy to imagine what would be the respective
conditions of two Italian languages which borrowed those alphabets, the one
from the earlier, the other from the later Greek. The former would contain
the equivalents to _vaw_ (6), and _kof_ (19); but be destitute of [phi],
[chi], &c.; whereas the latter would have [phi], [chi], &c., but be without
either _vaw_ or _kof_.

Much the same would be the case with any single Italian language which took
as its basis the _earlier_, but adopted, during the course of time,
modifications from the _later_ Greek. It would exhibit within itself
characters common to the two stages.

This, or something very like it, was the case with Roman. For the first two
or three centuries the alphabet was Etruscan; Etruscan derived _directly_
from the Greek, and from the _old_ Greek.

Afterwards, however, the later Greek alphabet had its influence, and the
additional letters which it contained were more or less incorporated; and
that without effecting the ejection of any earlier ones.

s. 163. With these prelimina