Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 18.djvu/502

SPEKE. 430 SPELLING. outlet of the lake. Speke was killed by the accidental discharge of his gun. His books were Tr/ia( Led to the Discovery of the Source of the Nile (1864), and Journal of the Discovery of the Houj-ce of the Xile (2 vols., 1863). His com- panion, Grant, also described their journey in A Walk- Across Africa (London, 1864). SPELLING (from spell. ME. spellcn, OF. espilcr. to spell, OIIG. spellOn, to declare, nar- rate, discourse, from OHG. spel, AS. spel, spell, Goth, spill, tale, narrative, liistory, tidings). The representation of words by combinations of alpha- betic symbols; the practical application or use of an alphabet. In an alphabet that is accu- rately constructed and used there is one, and but one, sj'mbol for each significant speech- sound, and but one speech-sound is represented b}' any given symbol. Under these conditions spelling is determined -solely by the pronuncia- tion ('sound') of the word to be spelled, that is, it is at once obvious when the pronunciation is known, and is accordingly marked by no irregu- larity or ambiguity. Such phonetically correct and simple orthography requires no special con- sideration apart from the alphabet employed. (See Alphabet; Phonetics; and Spelling Re- form.) Outside of the writings of phoneticians, however, spelling of this degree of precision does not exist, though in certain languages there is a fairly close approximation to it. In customary spelling, in brief, each of the above-stated princi- ples is, to a greater or less extent, violated, viz. there is alphabetic inadequacy, or the lack of s3Tnbols to represent certain important speech- sounds ; redundancy, or the use of two or more symbols or combinations of symbols to represent the same sound ; and the use of the same symbol or combination to represent two or more sounds. In other words, alphabetic writing as actually practiced is more or less ambiguous, irregular, and arbitrary. This divergence of cus- tomary spelling from the true alpbalictic method has resulted, historically, in jinrt, from defects inherent in the alphabets themselves (inade- quacy and redundancy) ; but principally from continuous change in the sounds of the languages to which they have been applied. Since in every language pronunciation varies from age to age and from locality to locality, the phonetic charac- ter which every alphabet has originally possessed — or, more precisely, its phonetic use in spelling — ■ could be maintained only by continuous adap- tation to these alterations of the uttered words. As a matter of fact changes of this sort in spelling have taken place in all alphabetically written languages, and in living European lan- guages in particular (which alone are considered here) they have occurred abundantly, especially prior to the invention of printing; but except in some modern instances they have been effected under conditions unfavorable to phonetic pre- cision, and so, in many cases, instead of produc- ing greater accuracy, have often resulted in in- creased confusion. At best they have been inade- quate to prevent spelling from becoming more and more faulty, from the phonetic point of view, as the alteration of pronunciation has advanced. Ambiguities and irregularities multiplied, new and complex associations between sounds and symbols were formed, and it became increasingly difficult to infer the pronunciation of a word from its written form. Moreover, this natural tendency toward plionetic corruption was intensified by a cause to which most of the defects of modern spelling may be attributed, namely, the estab- lishment of a 'standard,' relatively unchangeable orthography, due prineipall' to the introduction of the printing press. The beginnings of such an inllexible syston existed earlier, wherever certain spellings were recognized as customary and then as 'correct' from the literary point of view (regardless of their phonetic value), and the feeling that tlie unity of the written and spoken words should be preserved was, accord- ingly, weakened ; but its chief sources were the practical need of uniformity in spelling, which was qiiickly felt and (with much blundering) supplied in the printing office, and the influence of printed books. From this fixation of orthog- raphy it resulted not only that practically all the existing faults of the spelling found by the printer (together with those which he himself added) were rendered jjermanent, but also that even the imperfect earlier tendency to respond to phonetic change was almost wholly sup- pressed. Pronunciation has continued to change, often radically, but spelling has lagged behind. In certain languages notable divergence of the written from the spoken language has thus been effected, while others, like Italian, have been more fortunate in having had a relatively ration- al system of spelling to start with, or having undergone less extraneous disturbance, or having been able to adhere more closely or revert more frequently to the phonetic method. These facts are well illustrated by English spelling, which in its existing standard form presents an e.xtreme case of phonetic corruption or dealphabetization. The earliest English (. glo-Saxon) spelling was almost purely pho- netic, that is, the scribes sought to indicate the actual sounds of the words they wrfite, using — with a high degree of precision — for this purpose the Roman alphabet (with certain modifications) and giving to its letters the values assigned to them in the pronunciation of Latin, with which they were familiar. But as the sounds gradu- ally changed, confusion, due largel.v to imperfect adajitation (see above), slowly set in; certain symbols were not accurately distinguished, or were enijiloyed with dift'erent values in different combinations; the significance of some was ir- regularly altered and new ones were introduced; others were lost; and the accentual marks over the long vowels used in Anglo-Saxon disappeared, increasing the difficulty in distinguishing the long from the short vowels — a defect which has never been remedied except (in part) by non- alphabetic devices. But the most impor- tant irregularities were due to the influence of Norman, and later of literary (Parisian) French, under which, in the thirteenth and four- teenth centuries, English was practically re- spelled in accordance with Anglo-French meth- ods. Notwithstanding this and other sources of confusion, however, English spelling remained for a considerable period in a notable degree phonetic. The change effected by the invention of printing has been indicated above ; but it should be added that the printer's choice of spellings not only was not guided by any princi- ples, but was often determined by ignorance, English having suffered, in this particular, more than any other language. Alteration in response