CHAPTER III.
OF CERTAIN COMBINATIONS OF ARTICULATE SOUNDS.
[§ 215]. Certain combinations of articulate sounds are incapable of being pronounced. The following rule is one that, in the forthcoming pages, will frequently be referred to. Two (or more) mutes, of different degrees of sharpness and flatness, are incapable of coming together in the same syllable. For instance, b, v, d, g, z, &c. being flat, and p, f, t, k, s, &c. being sharp, such combinations as abt, avt, apd, afd, agt, akd, atz, ads, &c., are unpronounceable. Spelt, indeed, they may be; but attempts at pronunciation end in a change of the combination. In this case either the flat letter is changed to its sharp equivalent (b to p, d to t, &c.) or vice versâ (p to b, t to d). The combinations abt, and agt, to be pronounced, must become either apt or abd, or else akt or agd.
For determining which of the two letters shall be changed, in other words, whether it shall be the first that accommodates itself to the second, or the second that accommodates itself to the first, there are no general rules. This is settled by the particular habit of the language in consideration.
The word mutes in the second sentence of this section must be dwelt on. It is only with the mutes that there is an impossibility of pronouncing the heterogeneous combinations above mentioned. The liquids and the vowels are flat; but the liquids and vowels, although flat, may be followed by a sharp consonant. If this were not the case, the combinations ap, at, alp, alt, &c. would be unpronounceable.
The semivowels, although flat, admit of being followed by a sharp consonant.
The law exhibited above may be called the law of accommodation.
Combinations like gt, kd, &c., may be called incompatible combinations.
[§ 216]. Unstable combinations.—That certain sounds in combination with others have a tendency to undergo changes, may be collected from the observation of our own language, as we find it spoken by those around us, or by ourselves. The ew in new is a sample of what may be called an unsteady or unstable combination. There is a natural tendency to change it either into oo (noo) or yoo (nyoo); perhaps also into yew (nyew).
[§ 217]. Effect of the semivowel y on certain letters when they precede it.—Taken by itself the semivowel y, followed by a vowel (ya, yee, yo, you, &c.), forms a stable combination. Not so, however, if it be preceded by a consonant, of the series t, k, or s, as tya, tyo; dya, dyo; kya, kyo; sya, syo. There then arises an unstable combination. Sya and syo we pronounce as sha and sho; tya and tyo we pronounce as cha and ja (i.e. tsh, dzh.). This we may verify from our pronunciation of words like sure, picture, verdure (shoor, pictshoor, verdzhoor), having previously remarked that the u in those words is not sounded as oo but as yoo. The effect of the semivowel y, taken with instability of the combination ew, accounts for the tendency to pronounce dew as if written jew.
[§ 218]. The evolution of new sounds.—To an English ear the sound of the German ch falls strange. To an English organ it is at first difficult to pronounce. The same is the case with the German vowels ö and ü and with the French sounds u, eu, &c.
To a German, however, and a Frenchman, the sound of the English th (either in thin or thine) is equally a matter of difficulty.
The reason of this lies in the fact of the respective sounds being absent in the German, French, and English languages; since sounds are easy or hard to pronounce just in proportion as we have been familiarised with them.
There is no instance of a new sound being introduced at once into a language. Where they originate at all, they are evolved, not imported.
[§ 219]. Evolution of sounds.—Let there be a language where there is no such a sound as that of z, but where there is the sound of s. The sound of z may be evolved under (amongst others) the following conditions. 1. Let there be a number of words ending in the flat mutes; as slab, stag, stud, &c. 2. Let a certain form (the plural number or the genitive case) be formed by the addition of is or es; as slabis, stages, studes, &c. 3. Let the tendency that words have to contract eject the intermediate vowel, e or i, so that the s of the inflexion (a sharp mute) and the b, d, g, &c. of the original word (flat mutes) be brought into juxta-position, slabs, studs, stags. There is then an incompatible termination, and one of two changes must take place; either b, d, or g must become p, t, or k (slaps, staks, stuts); or s must become z (stagz, studz, slabz). In this latter case z is evolved. Again,
Let there be a language wherein there are no such sounds as sh, ch (tsh), or j (dzh); but where there are the sounds of s, t, d, and y.
Let a change affect the unstable combinations sy, ty, dy. From this will arise the evolved sounds of sh, ch, and j.
The phenomena of evolution help to determine the pronunciation of dead languages.
[§ 220]. On the value of a sufficient system of sounds.—In certain imaginable cases, a language may be materially affected by the paucity of its elementary articulate sounds.
In a given language let there be the absence of the sound z, the other conditions being those noted in the case of the words stag, slab, stud, &c. Let the intermediate vowel be ejected. Then, instead of the s being changed into an evolved z, let the other alternative take place; so that the words become staks, slaps, stuts. In this latter case we have an alteration of the original word, brought about by the insufficiency of the system of articulate sounds.
[§ 221]. Double consonants rare.—It cannot be too clearly understood that in words like pitted, stabbing, massy, &c. there is no real reduplication of the sounds of t, b, and s, respectively. Between the words pitted (as with the small-pox) and pitied (as being an object of pity) there is a difference in
spelling only. In speech the words are identical. The reduplication of the consonant is in English, and the generality of languages, a conventional mode of expressing upon paper the shortness (dependence) of the vowel that precedes.
[§ 222]. Real reduplications of consonants, i.e., reduplications of their sound, are, in all languages, extremely rare. I am fully aware of certain statements made respecting the Laplandic and Finlandic languages, viz., that doubled consonants are, in them, of common occurrence. Notwithstanding this, I have an impression that it is generally under one condition that true reduplication takes place. In compound and derived words, where the original root ends, and the superadded affix begins with the same letter, there is a reduplication of the sound, and not otherwise. In the word soulless, the l is doubled to the ear as well as to the eye; and it is a false pronunciation to call it souless (soless). In the "Deformed Transformed" it is made to rhyme with no less, improperly.
"Clay, not dead but soulless,
Though no mortal man would choose thee,
An immortal no less
Deigns not to refuse thee."
In the following words, all of which are compounds, we have true specimens of the doubled consonant.
| n | is doubled in | unnatural, innate, oneness. |
| l | — | soulless, civil-list, palely. |
| k | — | book-case. |
| t | — | seaport-town. |
It must not, however, be concealed, that, in the mouths even of correct speakers, one of the doubled sounds is often dropped.
[§ 223]. True aspirates rare.—The criticism applied to words like pitted, &c., applies also to words like Philip, thin, thine, &c. There is therein no sound of h. How the so-called aspirates differ from their corresponding lenes has not yet been determined. That it is not by the addition of h is evident. Ph and th are conventional modes of spelling simple single sounds, which might better be expressed by simple single signs.
In our own language the true aspirates, like the true duplications, are found only in compound words; and there they are often slurred in the pronunciation.
| We find | p and h | in the words | haphazard, upholder. |
| — | b and h | — | abhorrent, cub-hunting. |
| — | f and h | — | knife-handle, offhand. |
| — | v and h | — | stave-head. |
| — | d and h | — | adhesive, childhood. |
| — | t and h | — | nuthook. |
| — | th and h | — | withhold. |
| — | k and h | — | inkhorn, bakehouse. |
| — | g and h | — | gig-horse. |
| — | s and h | — | race-horse, falsehood. |
| — | z and h | — | exhibit, exhort. |
| — | r and h | — | perhaps. |
| — | l and h | — | well-head, foolhardy. |
| — | m and h | — | Amherst. |
| — | n and h | — | unhinge, inherent, unhappy. |
Now in certain languages the true aspirates are of common occurrence, i.e., sounds like the t in nuthook, the ph in haphazard, &c., are as frequent as the sounds of p, b, s, &c. In the spelling of these sounds by means of the English we are hampered by the circumstance of th and ph being already used in a different sense.