FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225  
226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   >>   >|  
in punctuation, because the latter are not alphabetic, and they represent silence, rather than sound; and also from the Arabic figures used for numbers, because these are no part of any alphabet, and they represent certain entire words, no one of which consists only of one letter, or of a single element of articulation. The same may be said of all the characters used for abbreviation; as, & for _and_, $ for _dollars_, or the marks peculiar to mathematicians, to astronomers, to druggists, &c. None of these are alphabetic, and they represent significant words, and not single elementary sounds: it would be great dullness, to assume that a word and an elementary sound are one and the same thing. But the reader will observe that this definition embraces _no idea_ contained in the faulty one to which I am objecting; neither indeed could it, without a blunder. So wide from the mark is that notion of a letter, which the popularity of Dr. Lowth and his copyists has made a hundred-fold more common than any other![67] According to an other erroneous definition given by these same gentlemen, "_Words_ are articulate _sounds_, used by common consent, as signs of our ideas."--_Murray's Gram._, p. 22; _Kirkham's_, 20; _Ingersoll's_, 7; _Alger's_, 12; _Russell's_, 7; _Merchant's_, 9; _Fisk's_, 11; _Greenleaf's_, 20; and many others. See _Lowth's Gram._, p. 6; from which almost all authors have taken the notion, that words consist of "_sounds_" only. But letters are no principles or parts of _sounds_ at all; unless you will either have visible marks to be sounds, or the sign to be a principle or part of the thing signified. Nor are they always principles or parts of _words_: we sometimes write what is _not a word_; as when, by letters, we denote pronunciation alone, or imitate brute voices. If words were formed of articulate sounds only, they could not exist in books, or be in any wise known to the deaf and dumb. These two primary definitions, then, are both false; and, taken together, they involve the absurdity of dividing things acknowledged to be indivisible. In utterance, we cannot divide consonants from their vowels; on paper, we can. Hence letters are the least parts of written language only; but the least parts of spoken words are syllables, and not letters. Every definition of a consonant implies this. 15. They who cannot define a letter or a word, may be expected to err in explaining other grammatical terms. In my opinion, nothi
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225  
226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
sounds
 

letters

 

letter

 

definition

 

represent

 

common

 

notion

 

alphabetic

 

principles

 

articulate


elementary
 

single

 
formed
 

voices

 

primary

 

definitions

 

imitate

 

pronunciation

 

principle

 

signified


visible

 
denote
 

punctuation

 

consonant

 
implies
 

syllables

 

language

 
spoken
 

define

 

opinion


grammatical

 

expected

 

explaining

 

written

 

acknowledged

 

indivisible

 

alphabet

 

things

 

dividing

 
involve

absurdity

 
utterance
 
consists
 

vowels

 

divide

 

consonants

 

articulation

 

blunder

 

peculiar

 

objecting