Yudu Villa, Thornton Heath,
October 1880.
CONTENTS.
| PAGE | ||
|---|---|---|
| Preamble, | [9] | |
| Origin and Descent, | [17] | |
| Original Alphabets—Primitive forms of H—Classic Forms. | ||
| Distribution, | [22] | |
| Phonetic Significance of Early H’s—Aryan and Other H’s. | ||
| History of the English H, | [27] | |
| Raucity of the Anglo-Saxon H—Norman Influences—Decline of the English H. | ||
| Modern Aspirates, | [35] | |
| Definitions—Terms of Convenience—Varieties of H—Vocalized and Unvocalized Breath—The H in Speech—Physiological Phonation of Aspirated Vowels. | ||
| Silent H, | [46] | |
| Orthoepists—Early Records of Silent H’s—Modern Pronouncing Dictionaries—Modern Usage—An American Hypothesis Considered. | ||
| Digraphs, | [62] | |
| Review of the Principal Digraphs of H—The Perfect Digraph WH—Phonic Analysis of W—WH=ʍ=An Unvocalized W. | ||
| Permutation, | [76] | |
| Philological Science—Grimm’s Law—The Future of H. | ||
| Appendix, | [82] | |
| Rev. W. W. Skeat, M.A., on Silent H’s. | ||
PREAMBLE.
A writer in a high-class American periodical[[1]] recently expressed his surprise that no English orthoepist or phonologist had made the subject of Aspirates and their misuse one of examination, or of more than a mere passing remark. True it is that in works where dissertations on single vowels occupy pages, and paragraph after paragraph teems with analyses of individual consonants, “poor letter H” is often summed up in a sentence. And yet it is no exaggeration to say that, socially, H is of English letters the most important, and that a systematic trifling with half the vowels and consonants of the alphabet would not be visited with such severe social reprobation as is the omission or misplacement of an H.
The fraternity of English Grammarians have, it might seem, conspired to withhold from us the means of propitiating this demon Aspirate, which a study of its attributes would afford. Mr Punch, that excellent censor of British manners and customs, has been the chief (not to say only) constant attendant to the English H-evil; but the fleam of his satire—an instrument as powerful, and often more effective, than the Thor-hammer of the Times—has scarified the abusers of H, without removing much of the abuse.
The American writer alluded to above enters, with the characteristic daring of his countrymen, upon the treacherous grounds of statistical definition, and states that, in England, “of the forty millions of people, there cannot be more than two millions who are capable of a healthy, well-breathed H.” He is treading in safer paths when he says:
There is a gradation, too, in the misuse of this letter. It is silent when it should be heard, but it is also added, or rather prefixed, to words in which it has no place. Now the latter fault is the sign and token of a much lower condition in life than the former.
He appears, however, to write in ignorance of the customs of many good speakers, and of the opinions of several English orthoepists, when he adds: “Only Englishmen of the very uppermost class and finest breeding say home and hotel; all others, ’ome and ’otel” Further on, he says: