An Orthography, Containing the Due Order and Reason, How to Write or Paint Th’Image of Man’s Voice Most Like to the Life or Nature

An Orthography, Containing the Due Order and Reason, How to Write or Paint Th’Image of Man’s Voice Most Like to the Life or Nature. Composed by I. H. Chester Herald John Hart. The Contents Whereof are Next Following

Sat cito si sat bene

Anno 1569.

{n. p.}

The Table of the Contents

The preface, wherein is briefly contained the reasons, causess, commodities, sum and effect of this treatise:

What letters are, and of their right use, Chapter I.

How some men maintain our abused English writing, Chapter II.

Of the diverse vices which use maintaineth in our writing, and how they are particularly by reason confuted, Chapter III.

Of the number of our vowels, and of their ancient sounds in which they are always used in the new manner hereafter, in which their perfect use, our present abused sound of some of them, are found to be diphthongs, Chapter IV.

The number of our consonants and breaths, which we use in our speech, with the leaving of superfluous letters, and receiving of such other as we need, and examples of their right use, Chapter V.

Of the accidents of vowels, to weet time, tune and breath with examples of diphthongs and triphthongs, with an order of distinction and pointing used thereafter, Chapter VI.

An exercise (in the new manner of writing) of that which is said, wherein is declared how the rest of the consonants are made by the instruments of the mouth, which was omitted in the premisses, for that we did not much abuse them, Chapter VII.

Examples how certain other nations do sound their letters both in Latin and in their mother tongue, thereby to know the better how to pronounce their speeches, and so to read them as they do, Chapter VIII.

And a table at the end, whereby the reader of the new manner may easily find the special and particular matters contained in this book.

{n. p.}

The Preface, Wherein is Briefly Contained the Reasons, Causes, Commodities, Sum and Effect of This Treatise

Writing is a reasonable marking or graving, or laying on of some colour differing from the superficies or ground, mind to the beholder, which is instructed in that manner. By which definition it appeareth that every man may devise his private manner for himself or such other as he will impart it unto. Cornelius Tacitus and Diodorus do write that the Egyptians did first use the figures of the diverse substance in man’s knowledge, thereby to represent the acts of Princes about their obeliscos for their posterity, and their minds one to th’other living: which was a tedious way, and therefore are we bound to acknowledge the benefit received of the first of our present manner, {A2} whereby a man may signify and leave behind him for ever whatsoever he can speak. And what writer both nearest and most justly decern the divers voices of the speech, he is best able to describe and paint the same with his pen, which manner of writing (for that it is most commodious) is treated on hereafter, for by the like things worthy memory are defended and preserved from all injury of forgetfulness, whereby is left unto us from right ancient times, of our most worthy predecessors, the most holy will of God, and necessary doctrines of many of his elect by divine inspiration, with many other humane policies and reasonable instructions and counsels written by many wise and studious men, and the same multiplied by their posterity, which by experience we see are greatly to the increase, nouriture, maintenance and defence of the few better sort, from the violence of the barbarous multitude. To the understanding whereof is first necessary the knowledge of letters, and where most of the people do best know them, there is {n. p.} most prosperity and best assurance. To which end is this treatise, for the profit of the multitude, and that by opening the window whereby is light given to decern betwixt perfection and barbarousness, so as every reasonable creature universally (of what nation soever understanding it) may be a perfect judge how every language ought to be written. Which is upon the consideration of the several voices of the speech, and the use of their several marks for them, which we call letters. But in the modern and present manner of writing (as well of certain other languages as of our English) there is such confusion and disorder, as it may be accounted rather a kind of ciphering, or such a dark kind of writing, as the best and readiest wit that ever hath been, could, or that is or shall be, can or may, by the only gift of reason, attain to the ready and perfect reading thereof, without a long and tedious labour, for that it is unfit and wrong shapen for the proportion of the voice. Whereas the new manner hereafter (though it seem at the first very {A3} strange, hard and unprofitable) by the reading only thereof, will prove itself fit, easy and delectable, and that for whatsoever English may be written in that order.

Yet I know that some at the first opening of the book, and seeing of the strange figures and manner of writing, will say, What, shall we now be set to school again even to our ABC? Then had we lived too long. Here are fair promises, like to this, that the tops of trees shall be planted in the ground, and the roses spread in the air, and bear so their fruits, with such other rash derisions as do make me laugh when I think on them. And so, considering the common opinion of mankind to be so earnestly given to th’imitation of their predecessors’ conditions and manner of doings, and (as it were with tooth and nail) to maintain for the best, those wherein they themselves have been trained and used from their cradle, I have stayed from publishing hereof many years. For whosoever shall speak or write for th’emendment of any whatsoever their customs, he shall be {n. p.} of the most part frowned at, or at least his purpose accounted to be superfluous and nothing necessary. And will not let at first to say that, if any fault were, it could not be left to these our days uncorrected, seeing so many wise and learned men in many ages have been before us, and therefore it is but folly to lend eye or ear thereunto. Which notwithstanding I trust it may do some good (though not in my days) to the posterity, for whose sake I think my labour well bestowed, for commonly th’inventions of the living are rather envied than favoured. You know that every man is as much bound to publish the thing which he hopeth may profit, as to keep silence of that he doubteth may be hurtful: and that as transgressors of good and reasonable laws are worthily punished, so th’inventors of profitable things, though not rewarded according to their deserts, yet are they of the most barbarous people favoured and born withal. And as no man ought to travel in this life only or chiefly for himself and his next blood, to the hinderance of others, but for {A4} the commonwealth of his country, though with danger of life, or the price thereof indeed. Who so may profit his country in any condition, and especially with small cost and no danger, he were unnatural to be a niggard thereof: though peradventure the travail, the cost and time which I have spent in other affairs thereby attaining to the knowledge to be able to compose this work hath been more dear unto me than some will think. And I right well know it can none otherwise be allowed, than as the learned sort by experience (mistress of all arts) shall find it reasonable and profitable: by whose judgements, as well mine adversaries as I, must of necessity be ruled, when time may serve, and in the meanwhile I shall be armed with patience to bear the anger of such as are obstinately bent to maintain their custom and use.

In any change which is to be attempted in any people’s manner of doing, there is requisite either excelling authority, or a good persuasion of a common commodity. The first must be obeyed what {n. p.} change of any inferior purpose soever may come thereof. And th’other is at liberty to be taken or refused, according as experience may find it profitable or hurtful.

Wherefore I will now signify unto such as have not wilfully professed themselves to be obstinate in their custom, that the use and experience of th’order of this following English Orthography shall bring these commodities following.  First it shall cause the natural English, knowing no letter, to be able to learn to decern and easily to read (whatsoever he may see before him so written or printed) so soon as he were able to learn readily, and perfectly to know and name the number of figures or members of the body and substance of our voice and speech, and so observing the new or strange order hereafter written, the learned man may instruct any natural English reasonable creature to read English, in one quarter of the time that ever any other hath heretofore been taught to read by any former manner. And in what less time, and {B1} how much more easy and ready it will be for the writer or printer, reader and hearer, I will not write, but leave it to the judgement of the reader of the said following treatise, and to the experience itself as occasion shall serve.

 Secondly, if any man of one or other nation would gladly learn to pronounce any strange speech which is accustomed to be written so confusedly, as it were (of necessity) only to be learned by the lively voice, and not able to be read by any order of their writing, as may be said of the Welsh and Irish; yet, using th’order hereafter, he shall be able to write either of them (or any other like) even as justly in the least voice, sound or breath, as it shall be naturally spoken unto him, and so read it again perfectly when and where soever he may see it, though many years thereafter, and though he understood no word thereof, and that by the reason hereafter showed. Whereas by our present disorder it often happeneth that a very good judgement may doubt in what sound many a word should be pronounced, {n. p.} until by reason of the sentence it be found, and many a man doth scantly know how the writing of his own name should be sounded, by which disorders and confusions there can be made no perfect dictionary nor grammar, which are very commodious for any stranger that desireth to learn our tongue by art, or for the rude to learn to speak well, as every child that hath learned his Latin grammar knoweth.

 Thirdly, we should not need to use above the two thirds or three quarters at most of the letters which we are now constrained to use, and so save the one third or at least the one quarter of the paper, ink, and time which we now spend superfluously in writing and printing.

 And last of all, English Latinisms may hereby understand the Italian and high Dutch and Welsh pronunciation of their letters, which by presumption is very near as the ancient Greeks and Latins did, being according to th’order and reason of their predecessors’ first invention of them, whereby our errors are {B2} the better perceived, and in the end of the book a certain example how the Italian, high Dutch, French, and Spaniard do use to pronounce Latin and their own languages. Truly the commodities aforesaid (which I persuade myself may follow), and the hinderance and confusion wherein I see we are, do cause me to put it into light: to th’end such as are able to be judges may be occasioned to consider thereof. Whose like (I mean the learned sort) have been, in times past, causers of our present manner of writing, by turning their pen to add or diminish, alter or change, as they thought meet into other letters and carats, much differing from the old Saxon manner. And the living do know themselves no further bound to this our instant manner, than our predecessors were to the Saxon letters and writing, which hath been altered as the speech hath changed, much differing from that which was used with in these five hundred, I may say within these two hundred years: which I considered of about twenty years passed, and {n. p.} thought it worth my labour, if I could find the mean of remedy of our present abuse. And so framed a treatise thereupon, and would then it had been published, but I am the gladder it hath been stayed until this time, wherein so well a learned gentleman in the Greek and Latin tongues, and travailed in certain vulgars, sir Thomas Smith knight hath written his mind, touching this matter in his book of late set forth in Latin, entitled De recta et emendata linguae Anglicae scriptione. Whereof and of this my treatise the sum, effect, and end is one, which is to use as many letters in our writing as we do voices or breathes in speaking, and no more, and never to abuse one for another and to write as we speak: which we must needs do, if we will ever have our writing perfect; and for such voices, sounds or breaths as we have no fit carats, marks or letters we may, without offence to God or reasonable man, choose and use fit new marks or letters for every of them, and so we may be duly served at our need: and {B3} not be driven to abuse anyone, in two or three sounds as we now do diverse. Which I find as reasonable as if a player of a comedy or tragedy would appoint the parts of the father, mother and child to be played all by one person, under one coat or gown, and one name, I confess the beholders sight should be the less troubled with divers shapes and colours, or with diversity of their names but what a confusion, and how much it would hinder the audience from the sense of the matter (though the personage could well counterfeit three divers voices) I report me unto you: yet matter, after often seeing and hearing thereof.

Herein shall be showed you the ancient use, power and sound of every letter, by examples in divers languages, and which letters, and how they are by us and certain other nations abused, so as such as do understand the said languages shall nothing doubt thereof.

Histories do show us that the Hebrews {n. p.} (being the most ancient nation) corrupted their speeches and writing whiles they were captives in Babilon.

And that the Romans, governing in manner the whole world, constrained such of every nation of their subjection, as they would use to deal with for their traffick and affairs to learn, use and exercise the Roman or Latin tongue and writing the best they could, though rudely and much corrupted, the Romans took pain therewith, rather than to be driven to learn the foreign and unruled manner of speech and writing, which they termed barbarous, as we, the French, and others, do account of the Welsh and Irish tongues, in whose manner of writing, peradventure there is better order kept than any of us aforesaid do.

And in like manner, the Romas afterwards, being invaded by the Goths, Vandals, Lombards and French men, by success of time, changed their ruled Latin to a vulgar Italian, which is also now much differing from the beginning {n. p.} or first hundred years use thereof, as in speech, so in writing.

Whereby you may understand that every nation doth frame her tongue to her speech the best she may, according to the right use of letters: which the most valiant and stout champion and maintainer of use and custom cannot deny: as I shall immediately hereafter show you by their weak reasons and arguments, which they are accustomed to make: and how they have been and may be answered. And that in this present manner of writing, unto the end of the VI chapter, whereby you may be sufficiently prepared to read that which shall thereafter follow in my purposed new manner, which is printed with certain such new figures or letters as I could best devise, both ready for the hand to write, and easy to print, and that to show you th’experience forthwith of the ease and commodities thereof. Which I doubt not but the tractable will with an upright judgement read and take a little pain to accustom himself to the due sounds of every vowel, {n. p.} diphthong and consonant for the first two or three leaves, and as he shall see cause so to do, and who so list not, he is at his choice to leave. And do desire no further that any man should understand my said purpose than as he may think to take some profit thereof, whereof I would be glad and sorry to offend any man, especially any reasonable and virtuous man, for the rest who can avoid their murmuring.

Vale.

{C1}

What Letters Are, and of Their Right Use

Chapter I

If I should write of the inventors of letters, wherein authors are so variable, you might say I followed their uncertainty, which though we knew, I see not what pleasure or profit it mought do us. Wherefore it shall be sufficient to understand (as experience teacheth us) that the inventors of letters whatsoever they were had a regard to man’s voice: considering how many diverse simple ways he might use his tongue and lips with his voice in his speech, which have been called elements, and that firstly. For as the four elements are the matter and substance of all things that are made in bodies and shapes, so are the simple voices the parts whereof the whole and round word and sentences are composed and made. For the noting and marking whereof, certain men in diverse and sundry peoples and nations have invented {n. p.} variable kinds of letters, each with their perfect difference for every differing voice, whereby it appeareth that as the voices in speaking do make a word, so the letters shall do the like in writing, seeing the voices are as elements and the letters their marks and figures. The simple voice is the least part or member of a speech, and the letter we may well call a manner of painting of that member for which it is written, whose quantity and quality is presented to the understanding thereby, and so the divers members of the speech ought therefore to have each his several mark. Whereby is gathered that even as everybody is to be resolved into those elements whereof it is composed, so every word is to be undone into these voices only whereof it is made. Seeing then that letters are the figures and colours wherewith the image of man’s voice is painted, you are forced to grant the writing should have so many letters as the speech hath voices, and no more nor less, so that, if it be found otherwise, for the abusion and falseness {C2} thereof it is to be refused. Of which mind was Quintilian, as it appeareth in the Xị chapter of his first book, noting the custom of abused writings, when he sayeth:  Ego (non quod consuetudo obtinuerit) sic scribendum quicque iudico quomodo sonat. Hic enim est usus literarum, ut custodiant voces, et velut depositum reddant legentibus. Itaque id exprimere debent quod dicturi sumus. Which signifieth, “I do not allow that which custom may have obtained. But do judge that all things ought to be written as it soundeth. This truly is th’use of letters, that they should keep the voices and yield them again unto the readers as a pawn or gage trusted unto them to that end, so they ought to express that which we would say”. You see that Quintilian would have the writing to be framed to the speaking, and how the letter ought to keep the voice, and not to be idle, usurped in sound or to be misplaced. Which disorders every nation and people must of necessity lean and forsake, if they will have their {n. p.} writing perfect, easy, and pleasant to be read. Which compass they must take, and use as infallible and certain to lead them the right course to be brought into the desired haven, I mean into the most perfect way of writing, assured from all offences of rocks or sands, in reading whatsoever variable blasts of contrary winds rooted in abuse may rise against them to drive them therefrom. It must be our weight and measure, touchstone and fire to prone our writing, and thereby to try with a perfect sight and judgement whether it be such as we may find therein the same number of letters in writing which we use of voices in speaking, without any scrupulosity of custom, time, derivation or difference, as shall be more at large said hereafter, and that after th’order of physics, which is first to understand the complexion, disposition and parts of the body, and then to know the nature of the causes which do offend, whereby the doctor may proceed without danger to minister purgations of the vicious humours with certain remedies, and then {C3} to prescribe the patient a wholesome diet and order to be preserved from falling into the like again.

How Some Men Maintain Our Abused English Writing

Chapter ị

Now, before I open the particular vices and abuse in our English writing, I will recite the chiefest of th’objections, which my contraries use. Some of them bring forth such small reasons (worse than Corinthians) as it were but labour lost to write them.

But others there are which maintain our superfluity of letters in writing with four arguments, wherein is some likelihood of reason.

 The first is under pretence to show the derivation and spring of some words borrower or taken forth of strange tongues.

 Another is, that it should be lawful to abuse some letters to put a difference betwixt equivocals or words of one sound. {n. p.}

 The third is for the time of vowels.

 But their strongest defence (which comprehendeth all) and that wherein they most triumph is use, whereof I will first speak generally until I have occasion by the particulars. As I have communed with some of them, first like friends they would persuade me not to speak of any misuse in our English writing, which (they say) is of late brought to such a perfection as never the like was before. Yet I stayed not therewith from my purpose but would answer them partly with the reasons in my preface. Then would they further reply the power and sounds of some letters have been over long double, for now to be received single, whatsoever they were anciently: for that which use by little and little and with long continuance bringeth into any people’s manner of doings is never spoken or written against without great offence to the multitude: which will be tenfold more stiff-necked to receive any new letters than a team of wild steers would be at first to receive the bearing of {C4} their yokes. Though th’experience should prove it to be very beneficial to their posterity so much they are offended at all innovations. Wherefore you may do well to deport you from further speaking thereof. Such discouragings would they use, as others yet do, and I know will as men grieved at the amendment of anything.

Yet you may see they cannot deny but plainly confess the vices in the corruption of the sound of letters, which we have in use, for want of others to signify the full number of our voices, and how they are but crept in amongst our predecessors, long since the first invention of letters, which therefore may the better be spoken against. Otherwise, all sin and vice which is naturally in the flesh and of longest used ought not by their reason to be spoken against, yet they may say we have the law of nature in our hearts, and the commandment of God written to teach us what we ought to do and leave undone. So say I that like as the law of nature in our hearts and commandments {n. p.} of God written do teach us a pureness of life to represent the nature of God, wherefore he created us: so ought the law of reason, which is in us, to turn our hands to order justly those figures and letters which we shall make to represent the voices of our pronunciation, wherefore we write them: and not to usurp others’ powers, or be idle in their own: or for want of better example of our predecessors, to portrait a monstrous figure, wanting such members as are manifest in the voice. For such an abused and vicious writing bringeth confusion and uncertainty in the reading, and therefore is justly to be refused and the vicious parts thereof cut away, as are the idle or offensive members in a politic commonwealth, or of trees or vines, in any man’s ground: and other fruitful and serviceable received, favoured, and conveniently set in their places. Further may they say, though, it should be never so profitable and allowed of all those learned and reasonable men, which would take the pain to read your reasons, and think {D1} well of them: yet the common people will as soon receive a new manner of speaking, as of writing of that they speak: and therefore it is but wind lost to speak of any use of letters in single sounds, seeing they are received and allowed for double or treble; or of any contentation to receive any new figures, or knowledge of accents, seeing we are contented with the present manner now accustomed. Yet can I not be so dissuaded in hope it may like the learned and reasonable, or at least give them occasion to put pen to the paper, for the amendment of our present errors, according to the saying of Cicero in his Paradoxis ad M. Brutum, videlicet: Nihil est tam incredibile, quod non dicendo fiat probabile: nihil tam horidum, tam incultum quod non splendescat oratione, et tanquam excolatur. Which signifieth, “There is nothing so incredible, but by declaration may be found probable: nothing so terrible, so rough and unfruitful, but by reasonable persuasion may be cleansed, made pleasant and profitable”. And a little after, Cicero {n. p.} declaring that he took in hand to speak of those things which the Stoics did in no wise allow of, and by the way of pastime to treat of certain common places, which (because they were marvellous or strange, and against the opinion of all men) they called paradoxa. Which he purposed to prove what effect his sayings might take, and that it might be tried what difference there was betwixt a learned and a vulgar persuasion. Which paradoxa he proved true, thereby showing what learning was able to do amongst the rude multitude.

Tongues have often changed (as it is said in the preface) then, if occasion in the fancies of men have had power to change tongues, much more reason should correct the vicious writing of the speech, wherein (as in all things) use should none otherwise take place, than experience proveth it to be reasonable and profitable, and the contrary to be taken for abuse or misuse. And therefore hath mankind the use of reason (above dumb beasts) to search the knowledge of the {D2} means to live in a perfection and to do all things as he ought for his wealth. Which whosoever should go about to resist may be right well accounted to be enemy both to God and mankind. Then let them resist and swell, as their nature is: yet shall it be as easy for them to make the seas fair meadows, as to make natural things to be found unnatural, or convert the nature of vice to be virtue indeed, what fair face or show soever it may bear. Wherefore as wisdom biddeth us to continue in such of our old fashions, or in others newly invented, which do lead us easily and without confusion to that but and end, whereunto we purpose and to reprove those which should bring troubles and lets in the way, to a confusible and uncertain manner of doing: so when we may amend either new or ancient manner from the trouble and unperfection of them, I think that a very little head (if it be not wholly idle) will say that their judgement is of very folly or madness, which shall speak against the plain and perfect way to the {n. p.} end pretended. And that we ought to have none other respect unto our late customs, or those which we hold of long times, or seem to be from ever, then as they shall be agreeing to reason and experience, which ought to be rule all things. Now that I have written of use in general, here follow the particular vices which may be in writing, in such order as the course of the matter doth lead, wherein I shall show their defences made for derivation, difference and time.

Of the Divers Vices which Use Maintaineth in our Writing, and How They Are Particularly by Reason Confuted Chapter II

A writing may be corrupted four ways: the first is by diminution.

The second by superfluity, and that three ways, videlicet, for time, derivation, and difference. {D3}

The third is by usurpation of one letter for another.

And the fourth and last, is by misplacing and disordering of them.

For the first, a  diminution is, when a writing wanteth sufficient marks for the voices of the speech, whereby the writer is forced to usurp one figure in two or more voices, as a vowel to be made to serve in two sounds, either of two vowels or of vowel and diphthong; or any one diphthong or double sound to be written for the longer time of one simple voice or sound of a vowel; or any vowel to be abused in th’office of a consonant; or for any consonant of one shape to be made to supply th’office of two voices or sounds; or the figure of the breath to be applied to any one consonant, to make her lose her accustomed sound, whereas the figure of the aspiration doth give (or ought to give naturally, and as it behoveth) us knowledge only when any vowel or diphthong should have a harder breath before or after it, then by the reason of her proper shape she ought to {n. p.} have. All which faults, by reason of want of proper letters, we do commitm whereby the reader is brought to great doubts, as shall be more at large said hereafter.

 Secondly, a writing is corrupted when any word or syllable hath more letters, than are used of voices in the pronunciation: whereby also the writing must needs be false and cause to the unexpert that voice to be pronounced in reading, which is not in the word in speaking. This abuse is great: partly without profit or necessity, and but only to fill up the paper in writing or the compositors line in printing to make a garnishing or furnishing thereof with superfluous letters, to satisfy the eye to another end than it ought or the fancies of others for derivations and differences; and partly upon a reasonable cause, which is for time , when the vowel should be longer sounded in one place than in another. Which, I confess, we are forced to foe and is necessary, so long as we use to double our vowels for other sounds than their own, and will not use to double them for the longer {D4} quantity of their proper sounds, nor do so much as to use a mark to signify the same longer time, as other perfect writings of other tongues have. But for derivation or difference there is neither necessity nor commodity to drive us thereunto in any respect; and for time, I trust there is sufficient remedy in my new manner of writing, thereby to be eased of the abuse wherein we now are.  For the opinion to maintain a certain superfluity of letters, to show the derivations of words from any strange language of ours, it is even as we would not have any stranger to be conversant nor dwell amongst us though he be a free denizen and is fully bent to live and die with us to the’nd of his life, except (of a certain fond curiosity) he should wear continually some mark to be knowen whence he is, I think, to th’end we should be able to know thereby how to refuse him when some of us listed. Otherwise, if he may be accounted as one of ours? Why should he not be framed in every condition as we are? That is, to show himself, appear {n. p.} and be in very deed natural in every condition, as we are, and leave all his colours, or marks of strangeness for so the French do term it, when any sorren is so received amongst them, they call him naturalized.  Yet will my contraries say that it is meet to be superfluous in writing, first for the knowledge whence the word is derived;  and besides that we are bound to leave some letter or letters in the words which we borrow of other tongues, though we sound them not: to be as of duty for a continual knowledging and remembrance of the profit received, even as every gentleman is known by his arms, which are duly belonging to him. Yet have they said little for the purpose, except they can certify us how we are bound unto it, and of the profit of such mereness and conveniency of writing of any superfluous letter, to know whence the word is derived as men are by their arms.  First, if it were convenient or meet, it is for some profit we should receive thereby in using it, or to avoid some displeasure or loss in leaving {E1} it, as for the profit we see none, but contrarywise great discommodity in disordering our writing from our pronunciation: to the great let trouble and hinderance both of the writer and reader.  Secondly, if there mought come any displeasure by leaving it undone, it must be ministered by those nations whose words we so borrow, and that upon a malice conceived against us for writing of their speech, otherwise than they do. Such like (worse than brute) fantasies if any people had, I think they would be much more choleric for misspeaking of their speech than for miswriting thereof: for that it may much more offend them, as when a smatterer of their speech should talk unto them, so as they could not thereby conceive his intention, rather than if his writings were given them, wherein the words which we have borrowed of them were not written with some difference, more after their use than our pronunciation. For if all their words therein were written thoroughly as their own hand would, yet without understanding of the {n. p.} rest, which should be for our mother tongue, they shall so well know what the matter meaneth, as I know the great Turks thoughts. Wherefore, if any people could be angry with this matter, they should much sooner be grieved with the otherwise speaking than the otherwise writing; yet of neither I think any people were ever so envious as to complain. And for the reason of arms there is no such convenience or duty in writing of a strange word, for like as every stranger that any prince receiveth to be employed in his service what arms soever his house doth give he beareth notwithstanding the general mark wherewith the prince’s natural subjects are knowen from his adversaries; so ought the strange word (of what language soever) have the general and perfect mark of the idiomate, whereinto it is received, even as in speech so in writing. And like as two gentlemen aliens of one house and arms may seek their adventures and serve two princes enemies and differ their conditions so {E2} much from their natural as the time and manner of the country shall minister occasion, and that without reproach of any reasonable man; so may every nation use others words as they may best frame their tongue thereunto, the writing whereof ought to be accordingly without any scrupulosity. Thus, we see no meetness or convenience for the observing of superfluous letters in derivations.

 Now let us understand what bonds we be in, if we be bound it is either by the law of nature or by some manner of agreement of peoples one with th’other. As forth law of nature (which is to do as we would be done unto) I trust there is none English man but would be contented that any nation should borrow of our language part or all, and use it both in their speech and writing as they mought best serve and please themselves therewith. What should it grieve us? But even as the shining of the sun upon any other country besides ours. And for any bond or agreement betwixt peoples, you {n. p.} know well there hath been none such; if there had, it should have been but unreasonable and cruel. And further, it should have been general for all words borrowed of what tongue soever, as well as for a few borrowed of some tongues. Then should we have written yet much worse than we now doe, for the substance of our tongue is derived from the Dutch or Saxon tongue, from which we differ in our writing (and that necessarily) so much that the French tongue written is as easy to the Saxons as our English, or the Frenche or Saxon to us; wherefore more meet it is, we should so differ from them to our just pronunciation (and that as well in all words borrowed of whatsoever tongue) than to write as they do, wholly or partly from our speaking. For any affection we have unto derivation what could we vary from our pronunciation in these words: Thou hast a good grandfather, except we would write the very Saxon tongue as thus, Du habst ein gut groszvatter. The like is it for “mother”, “brother”, “sister”, “son”, and {E3} “daughter”, which they write, můtter, brůder, schwester, son, vnd tochter, and infinite other simple words, as such as understand the tongue do well know. And many sentences so near as we know not what other order to use, then to write them the best we can as we speak them, except we would write the Saxon itself, as thus, “a natural brother by father and mother will live with brotherly love”, ein natürlicher brůder von vatter vnd můtter, wil laben mit brůderlich lieb. Wherefore should we be any more scrupulous in the writing of any words derived from other tongues than we are of those? Some think the Scottish speech more ancient English than as we now speak here in England, yet there is no living Englishman so much affected to write his English as they do Scottish, which they write as they speak and that in many words more near the Latin, from whence both we and they do derive them, as fruct for “fruit”, and fructful for “fruitful”, disponed for “disposed” or “distributed”, humely {n. p.} for “humbly”, nummer for “number”, pulder for “powder”, salviour for “saviour”, and compt for “account”, and diverse others, wherein we pronounce not those letters which they do and, therefore, write them not as reason is. Yet in others we do exceed with them, as the b in “doubt”, c and h in “aucthority”, i in “souldiour”, o in “people”, s in “baptism”, p in “corps” and in “condemned”, and certain like. And whereas of this word campus for the place where an host of men do lie is said of the French, le caump, of us and the Scotsmen “the camp”, yet do we diversly derive other words therefrom of one sense as the French do call the fields of corn, les çhaumps, and a good warrior, ung çhaumpion, which we write and say “a champion”, but the Scotsmen campioun. The French sayth esçhappe, the Scots çhapit, and we “scaped”, whereby you may see there is no cause for derivation to use any superfluous letters in writing, when as the voice is not spoken.

 Then for difference, which is their last defence, wherewith they maintain excess {E4} of letters in writing, they pretend it convenient for two causes:  the first is for a knowledge of equivocals, which are words of one sound in speaking yet signifying diverse things and would seeme thereby to correct the nature of the speech, with their pen, thinking that, by their letter added at their discretion, the reader shall have the better understanding, for which thing it must be taken. As in this sentence, “a hat for my son to keep him from the burning of the sun”, where is written o for the boy to be knowen not to be meant the planet Sun, which is written truly as we sound it and as we sound the boy also, and therefore ought so to be written. For being so written, who (seeing the sentence) will any more doubt of the true meaning thereof, then when he shall hear it spoken. As of this part of difference, I shall write more at large after I have briefly showed you the two other vices of usurpation of powers and misplacing of letters.  But first, of th’other difference which they say, is for a help to the understanding of some words, {n. p.} simple and others compound, by writing some letters which we use not to sound in speech, which is called etymology, seu veriloquium, and of others originatio. Whom I answer thus, etymology doth by circumstance expound and make plain the reason wherefore the word or name of thing is so called; as if you would know why “twenty”, “thirty”, “forty”, “fifty” etc. be so called, I may answer, the etymology is “twaine tens”, “three tens”, “fowre tennes”, etc., which we use to speak and write notwithstanding, as before said, and understand thereby what numbers that meane in speech and writing, and for the river of Tems is well known what I meane writing it so, without any need to write “Thame-Isis”, each syllable being (as I have heard) the names of two several rivers before they join. And so, the writer ought to be careful to write every word as it is spoken, maintaining his orthography as some other vulgar nations do, and as the Latins did. As for example, what other letter will any {F1} man take upon him to add (for any affection he hath to etymology) to this word Lepus, then even so as it hath ben left us by the Latins, although it be (by circumstance) of many expounded, (and he reason thereof giveth it) to be quasi levipes, vel quasi levem habens pedem.

And this word, Heralt, is wholly a Dutch word compounded of Her and Alt, which is old “Master”, according to the saying of Aeneas Silvius, Erant autem heroes veterani milites: yet some do compound it with one Dutch word and another French, writing Herhault, signifying a “high Maister”, but the etymology of the word doth prove it to be Heralt; he should have a wrong opinion of me that should think by the premisses I meant anything should be printed in London in the manner of Northern or Western speeches: but if anyone were minded at Newcastle upon Tyne, or Bodmin in Cornwall to write or print his mind there, who could justly blame him for his orthography to serve his {n. p.} neighbours according to their mother speech, yea, though he wrote so to London, to whomsoever it were, he could be no more offended to see his writing so than if he were present to hear him speak:  and there is no doubt but that the English speech – which the learned sort in the ruled Latin, together with those which are acquainted with the vulgars Italian, French, and Spanish do use – is that speech which every reasonable Englishman will the nearest he can frame his tongue thereunto. But such as have no conference by the lively voice, nor experience of reading, nor in reading no certainty how every letter should be sounded, can never come to the knowledge and use of that best and most perfect English which, by God’s grace, I will the nearest I can follow, leaving many an inkhorn term (which I could use) because I regard for whose sake I do it.

 Thus, I cease to speak any further of the vice, which may be in a writing and which use keepeth in ours, is to give divers {F2} powers to one letter, to the uncertainty and confusion of the reader, as shall be said fully of every one of our abuses, of every letter at large in my new manner of writing hereafter. Yet for example presently, as when we write, yonder two gentlemen came together upon two gennets to give them to my Lord. Is there any knowledge in the writing to give a man to understand when to sound the g as we use before e and i, and when as before a, o and u? For, following our custom, we should always give it one sound before e and i, as in “gentle” and “Giles”. Our abuses are as great in others and, therefore, need fit not in use, as shall hereafter appear. Where I need not to usurp any one letter or breath one for another.

 Last of all, a writing may be corrupted by misplacing of letters, which we also use (I should say as of the others abuse) and that most in the final syllables ending in c or l, aspired in pronunciation where we write the e after, when we pronounce it before, or no perfect e at all sounded, {n. p.} as in “ordre”, “bordre”, “numbre", “rendre”, which have been well left of late days; yet some such as would show their knowledge of the French are curious therein, and in “trifle”, “able”, “beadle”, “snaffle”, “buckle”, etc – whereas in the first four and such like, the e is better before, and nearest as we speak it, and though the French speak it after – it is nothing to us, for we pretend to write our speech and not theirs, but it were much better (if it were in use, and as I do use, in my following new manner) to consider that we in speech do not sound fully two syllables, but one and an addition of a half syllable softly aspired, which the r doth always take with it, and often the l in our speech, as in the last five words but not in many other words, for which difference we have yet received no perfect mark or letter, which I do hereafter use for the commodity of the reader. And, therefore, did the inventors of letters call l, m, n and r, liquids or semivocals, which signifieth “half-vowels”, or “having in manner the virtue of vowels”. They now, for lack of better reason, will say {F3} that who so hath the use of our pronunciation and will give himself to reading shall not stick at such trifles. I grant no less, but then he must first speak well, before he shall ever read truly and so, by learning to read, he shall be nothing helped to attain to speak well and truly. Hereby you may see how they closely confess that our writing is doubtful and hard, and that the reader must search his remembrance where he may find the word more perfectly written than on the paper. Thus, trusting there is sufficiently said to prove that in our doings we ought none otherwise defend ourselves with use than as we shall find it profitable and joined with reason. Yet will not some of them be contented, but in their malice (when they see reason thus assail them) as men amazed they will stand and scold until they be overcome and say, “See the vainglorious fool who thinketh himself to know more, and to see further, than other studious men, which have spent many years in learning and yet find no such faults”. To {n. p.} them I answer, time trieth truth, and though God hath given me this his gift, is his work therefore to be barked at? You know God bestoweth his gifts diversly, to someone talent, to some another, non omnia possumus omnes, and that all to his glory, wherefore they charge me wrongfully with vainglory or any such like. What are these railings other than like as a man, seeing his enemy coming towards him, strongly armed with his weapon, and himself unarmed without weapon, and did not (as wisdom were) provide himself with armour and weapons meet for his defence, but stand scolding and ask whether he thought to be able to overcome him. In like manner is it folly, so like ignorant men at their wit’s end to rail at him that shall reasonably speak against any disorder and abuse in what fashion of living soever it be, when they should debate the matter particularly, and by the small roots. Yet thus do some of them, which would be taken for wise and learned men, and that in the sciences, thinking that any learning {F4} which is set forth by any other man than by some one of themselves, though it be never so reasonable and true, should sound to their infamy and shame, if they should agree thereunto; and that their obstinate opinion in ignorance and false learning should appear to be great wisdom and, therefore, thought honourable.  Which sort do cause me yet to say somewhat more, touching our superfluous writing for the difference of words of one sound. Some of them will say it is necessary to put difference in words of one sound, least the reader should gather a misunderstanding of them. If that were true, we should by like reason use a cackling and chattering instead of plain speaking; for, as they say, it is necessary to write different letters that the reader should not understand amiss, so say I, that it is needful for the reader to pronounce the same difference of letters written, least the audience, for want of hearing thereof, should fall into the same doubt which they say the reader should do by sight, if they were not written. {n. p.} Thus, you see by their observing of differences, we should be constrained to speak a fair other speech and language than we now do. That we may the better understand their minds, let us consider how many differences there are in writing, and we shall find three:  the one is the common difference, when we write all or some divers letters to signify diverse things as the earth, air, fire and water, and all things to man’s knowledge or imagination compounded of them; and this difference is so much as every man’s hand writing doth somewhat differ from another, even as do their faces, which is th’effect of their writing, first spoken of in the preface.

 The second is for the accident of the voice spoken, whether it should be long or short, sharp or flat, spoken with a hard or soft breath, and with as near a knowledge as a man’s hand may note to mark what voice should be sounded at some time being written,  and in another place be left out, and the place marked to be unsounded.  When the tongue doth use to join together for divers words, as {G1} though they were but one,  and when the writing mought else give the reader cause to sound some diphthong or triphthong, when the use of the tongue is to sunder them into two syllables, that he may have an assured mark for the knowledge thereof; and for distinction and pointing to give the reader knowledge the nearest a man may to pronounce the writing, as the writer would speak it.

Of which accidents I will write for the help of the ignorant of them, and give sufficient examples before I enter to the use of them, together with the knowledge of the several voices which are in our speech with convenient marks or letters for those that we lack. Wherefore I will pass these other accidents till then except the first, whereof I think it meet to say somewhat presently. Which is for time long or short, as in this sentence, “commonly ware is deare in ware time”, where we use the final e, in “ware”, “deare” and “time” for the longer quantity of the preceding vowels, and that with some reason, lacking a not for {n. p.} the knowledge of that quantity, but for the shorter time of the a, in “ware” (to differ “ware” from “ware”, according as we differ in speech) it is very unreasonably begun and so continued to add another syllable to weet re, which we use in infinite such like words, where there mought appear the same doubt. Yet others with some more reason in such words do only double the consonant without the e, as in “all”, “barr” and “sadd”. But both should be superfluous, using a knowledge for the long vowel and all other without that mark to be known thereby to be short, with the help, at some times, of the acute accent to signify the shortness, when any doubt might be, as by experience it may appear unto you in my new manner hereafter. And for the longer quantity of the vowel, it had been very well (if our predecessors had kept the vowels in their proper sounds) to have used them double therefore which now in doubling we sound otherwise than in their own sounds.

 But now this third last difference, {G2} rooted only in man’s wit, is that which dissolveth our doubt: whereby a man’s judgement is able to decern the sundry meaning of words, like as in hearing so in reading by the reason and discourse of the matter and sentence; and that not only, if they be written or spoken somewhat amiss, but though there were some syllable lacking, other the thing (by distance of countries) otherwise named, where it was written than where it was read. Wherefore, if difference were so necessary as they say, it were much more needful in the speaking than in the writing, seeing the speech passeth so quickly away, whereas the writing remaineth so as the reader may toss and turn it in searching (by reason of the sentence) the true meaning of the doubtful word. As in these examples following: “He was at the plough in Smithfield with good oxen, and after at the harrow with good horses”. Who so knoweth Smithfield to be a weekly market of horses and all accustomed time of cattle, and signs to be made with little counterfeit ploughs and harrows, {n. p.} for knowledge of houses, shall forthwith conceive the writer’s mind even as he mought, if he had heard him speak. Also, “Well, boy, I say beware the well, it is deep”; and “This great bear will bear ten dogs”; and “Hodge Bill, with his brown bill, brought me a sealed bill and a woodcock by the bill”; and “Your horse bare a heavy load, being bare before”. And many other equivocals, where we make no difference in speech, and therefore ought we to make none in writing: though they be of diverse significations, if now they could show me their reason why they use their fantasy in some and not in these foresaid and many more, against the order of good writing, I would be glad to hear them. But I know they cannot, except they would say (as the truth is) it is for fear it should be too easy for the reader. This wit and experience of man is able to decipher and declare the meaning of some dark writings which he never saw before, although there were used therein great study, that no man but such as had {G3} the order of it, in mind or writing, should be ever able to read it (as I have heard of one hath been able to do) much more than of that the writer is willing every man should read. By this we may also perceive that superfluous letters to cause the writing of a word to differ from the speech, for etymology is in like manner nothing necessary nor commodious. Let us conclude then that, though these observers of differences would never so fain corrupt the order of writing in words of one sound, yet may they not break the law of true writing. And that we abuse not letters signifying voices for the mark of time, especially when we may (with pleasure) remedy it, as by experience is laid hereafter before your eyes, and found more easy, short, profitable and certain. And that finally (notwithstanding those fantastical sophisters, which do endeavour to maintain our vicious writing by their divers defences) we must be ruled by our speech, and even as the tongue doth change th’accidents of voices in place, time, tune, and number, so {n. p.} we always in our writing to change the marks, being the image of the voice, even as the painter ought to change the variable quantities and accidents in the images of the man whose figures he would counterfeit for every ten years of his age. And now the better to call to remembrance the principal partes and effect of that which hath been said, I will use this allegory and compare the lively body of our pronunciation which reason biddeth the writer to paint and counterfeit with letters, unto a man which would command an indiscreet painters to portray his figure as thus, naming the man Esope, who, coming to a painter, saith: “Friend, I would have thee to counterfeit the quantity and quality of my body and apparel by thy craft so lively, as those men which have even now seen me may know (whensoever they may see it hereafter) that the same is made to represent me unto them, as I now am”.

The Painter answereth: “Sir, stand you there, and I shall do it, as I use to do others, and as all the painters of {G4} this country are accustomed to do”. Esope, “How is that?” The painter answereth: “Though you wear hose and shoes, your figure shall need none. But it shall therefore have painted other apparel by a third more than you wear, and upon every several piece, I will mare whence it came. And because your clothes, as well the cloth as the fur and silk, are of one colour, I will make them to be the better seen of divers colours. I will also write in your forehead your father’s and mother’s name, that men may see of what stock you are come of. Whereas in some countries painters do use to make the nose, of like quantity to that in the body, we set others at the ends of them; and for making the littleness of the eyes we make the compass of the head greater than the natural and double the eyebrows. {n. p.} Then, in the place of ears, we do use to paint eyes. 

And last of all, I will change the middle fingers and thumbs in others places”. The painter: “How like you this, will it not do well?” Esope: “Yes, but I would fain know for what purpose and the reason wherefore you would do thus”. The painter: “Because the painters of this country, for time out of mind, have used the like, and we continue therein, and because it is so commonly received as it is no man needeth to correct it”. A good answer. Now leave we them, and I demand the maintainers of such painters of our pronunciation if they had forty or more of their portraitures drawn, shaped and coloured of their foresaid friend, and those same set upon the pillars of Paul’s Church, who should be able to know (but they themselves, being daily used in naming them) which should be for the one, or which for the other. For they should not half so well represent them as should the well-proportioned figures of so many skipping babions, {H1} apes, marmosets or monkeys, and dancing dogs and bears.

Better can not a writer be compared than to a painter, for, as never painter could counterfeit the liveliness of a man (though he beheld him all his life) except he first considered all his lineaments and proportions, and knew the diversity of his colours, and understood well that one colour cannot make two places of one hew to be of divers colours, what quantity so ever he lay on. So was there never writer ignorant of all the particulars, of the voices spoken, and that shall want due marks and colours for them, that could perfectly counterfeit the pronunciation, though by use (or better abuse) it were allowed. Wherefore, that the reader may use the perfect way in every English word which may be spoken (calling English all derived words received, or which hereafter shall be) and be no longer troubled in this disorder and abuse; to the confusion and trouble of the reader, I will immediately hereafter show you all the {n. p.} voices which our speech useth, and so use several marks or letters for every one of them, with necessary accents, and use of pointing, and then I will put it in experience in the rest of my treatise thereafter.

Of the Number of our Vowels, and of their Ancient Sounds, in Which they Are Always Used, in the New Manner Hereafter: by Which their Perfect Use, Our Present Abused Sounds of Some of Them, Are Found to Be Diphthongs

Chapter IV

Now that there is sufficiently said what letters are and of their right use, and of the vices which some do maintain in our English writing, so as me thinks every reasonable man may be answered therewith, I shall briefly in this chapter show you what voices, sounds and breaths we use in our speech, and accordingly use one simple and sole {H2} figure for each one of them: much differing from the disorder and confusion we now are in, and that by forgetting and leaving all superfluous letters unused, and calling to mind and taking of others fit and commodious for us, with sufficient examples of their due, sole, and only sounds. And afterwards of the accenting and pointing wherein the rest of this treatise is written. As touching the divers sounds and noises which are and may be by inanimate things, nor of such sound and voices as are made of brute and dumb animals, they do nothings appertain to this purpose, but only of the reasonable speech of mankind, and especially of our English tongue, which speech reasonable is made with divers organs and instruments, namely the breath from the lungs or lights, arteries, throat, uvula, mouth, tongue, teeth and lips, but such of them as do give us the most distinction and perfect sense of the sound or breath given are the tongue, the teeth and lips, by their divers use and feelings or touching in and of the mouth. {n. p.} Wherefore I will forthwith show you their figures in such wise as with our passed and yet our present manner of orthography you may understand by what voice or breath every one letter is used in the Vị chapter, and the rest of this treatise hereafter. Where I shall further treat, with more ample reasons and authorities than is done in this manner of writing, why their figures should be proper unto them, by reading whereof you may find by experience the manifest commodities before said. First, I find that we use five differing simple sounds or voices, proceeding from the breast without any manner of touching of the tongue to the palate or fore-teeth, or of the lips close joining together, or either of the lips to their counter teeth. Their due and ancient sounds may be in this wise very sensibly perceived: the first with wide opening the mouth, as when a man yawneth, and is figured a . The second with somewhat more closing the mouth, thrusting softly the inner part of the tongue to the inner and upper great teeth, (or {H3} gums for want of teeth) and is marked e . The third by pressing the tongue in like manner, yet somewhat more forward, and bringing the jaw somewhat more near, and is written i . The fourth by taking away of all the tongue, clean from the teeth or gums, as is said for the a, and turning the lips round as a ring and thrusting forth of a sounding breath, which roundness to signify the shape of the letter was made (of the first inventor) in like sort, thus o . For the first and last, by holding in like manner the tongue from touching the teeth or gums (as is said of the a and o) and bringing the lips so near together as there be left but space that the sounds may pass forth with the breath so softly that (by their over hard and close joining) they be not forced through the nose, and is noted thus u . And, holding the top of your finger betwixt your teeth, you shall the more sensibly feel that they are so made with your said instruments. So you may consider how these five divers sounds are distinctly made. Yet some man {n. p.} may doubt how to sound part of them, because they have been and are abused in divers sounds. Wherefore, after I have said somewhat of them, I shall show you their ancient sounds yet generally used through all Dutchland over and nether in their vulgar tongues, and in pronouncing their Latin, the like of Italy, also of the French, the Spanish, and Brutes for the a, e, i, and o. But these three last named nations do all abuse the u with us in sound, and also the German and Italian for the consonant except the ancient Brutes which have always continued this figure v  for the consonant, whose example I do mind to follow. And we ourselves do rightly sound all five vowels in the Gospel in Latin, In principio erat verbum etc. unto sine, where i is sounded the diphthong ei  or Greek ει, and in qui, as though it were written quei, whereas in quis and quid it is rightly sounded, also the grammarians self, which teach the grammar, do fall into the fault of iotacism, which forbidden them at the beginning {H4} thereof, and do pronounc the same in these pronouns following and infinite other words, as in the vocative mi, they sound in mει or mei: mei they sound meει or meei, whereas in mihi many of late days do sound the i right in both syllables, even as i in nobis, the like true sound of i, they use in tui and sui but will not yet frame their tongues to sound it so in tibi and sibi, as they do in mihi, vobis, tuis, and suis, ille, ipse, iste, his, and is. Yet in the declining of them they misname the i in the second syllable, as in illius, illi, ipsius, ipsi, istius, isti, and the like in the nominatives plural, but in the datives and ablatives they can sound it right. Which fault none of all the nations before named did ever commit for the i vowel, but do keep it still in one sole and the ancient sound, even as the natural and artificial Greeks do their iota, which also did never make it consonant; no more have the Brutes, the Germans, nor the Italians, which Italians have devised for the sound of consonant the gi, nor have any of the other three nations {n. p.} (as far as I can learn) that sound of gi in their speeches, as shall be said more at large when I come to treat of g, yet the French and Spanish with us and the Scotsmen do usurp the i  before a, o, and u, as the g before e and i. And for the diphthong ei, many ancient grammarians, in borrowing of Greek words, have put often i alone. Which the German doth not allow, knowing them of long continuance to be of divers sounds, and therefore, when they think the ei meet to be sounded in such words as are derived from the Greek, they write it so: which whoso list may see in a Latin and Dutch dictionary, author Peter Dasypodius, entitled Dictionarium latino-germanicum, et vice versa Germanico-latinum. And out of all doubt no nation of the foresaid but we and the Scottish do at any time sound i in the foresaid sound of ei. Wherefore, that English Greek reader which shall give the same sound to i which he doth to ει doth further this error much amongst us. Now to come to the u . I said the {I1} French, Spanish, and Brutes – I may add the Scottish – do abuse it with us in sound and for consonant, except the Brutes as is said; the French do never sound it right, but usurp ou; for it, the Spaniard doth often use it right as we do, but often also abuse it with us; the French and the Scottish in the sound of a diphthong  which, keeping the vowels in their due sounds, cometh of i and u (or very near it) is made and put together under one breath, confounding the sounds of i and u together, which you may perceive in shaping thereof; if you take away the inner part of your tongue from the upper teeth or gums, then shall you sound the u right; or  in sounding the French and Scottish u holding still your tongue to the upper teeth or gums, and opening your lips somewhat, you shall perceive the right sound of i. But for the e and o I find not that any of the said nations do abuse them as we do, except the French in the on for u, as is said (and that constrained thereunto with us, I must needs say, because they nor we {n. p.} have used the u and we only the i in their due sounds) to call the e, in teaching the ABC in the sound of i and to double the e for that sound, as in “see the bee doth flee”. And o single or double in the sound of u, as “they two come to do some good”, which is the mere sound of the u. As for the a, we do little abuse, wherefore I omit it in this place. And for the quantity of vowels, I never mind to use the final e , making two syllables in writing when one is spoken, but do borrow the use of the Greeks, which were wont to write their I in the line after vowels which were long, and do use it still after great letters, as we do the e, for the quantity of the preceding vowel. But now they write it under the small and in some prints is but even a prick, and the like may serve us for the quantity of vowels, which I use hereafter. And to persuade you the better that their ancient sounds are as I have said, I report me to all musicians of what nations soever they be for a, e, i and o; and for u also, except the French, Scottish, and Brutes {I2} as is said, for namely all English musicians (as I can understand) do sound them, teaching ut, re, mi, fa, sol, la. And so do all speakers and readers often and much in our speech, as in this sentence: “The prattling hosteler hath dressed, cured, and rubbed our horses well”, where none of the five vowels is sounded, but kept in their proper and ancient sound. And so we may use them to our great case and profit. And for their longer time it were more reason to double themselves, in the place where the quantity and longer sound is made, than to write the e for it at the end of the syllable or word, or to write a diphthong in the middest for like longer time, whereas one vowel only is sounded. For the word diphthong signifieth a double sound, and the vowels (th’one takes not any part of the sound of the other) are made of sole and single or simple sounds; but for the said longer time, the prick under will be most fit and convenient. And as you are hereafter provided for therein, so are you for the consonants v {n. p.} and j, so that you may keep the five vowels in their only figures and sounds, as in these examples hereunder, so always of our predecessors and the living now still used.

The ancient and sole sounds of the five vowel are of

Which is their due and proper sounds, and as we ourselves use them when we read Latin, as is said of In principio unto sine, and so through the Gospel except a few other words as the i, in vita, vitam, viri, and qui some sound it also in ei, and the u in lux we universally sound it right, but in lucet and lumine, some usurp the French and Scottish sound, and also in fuit, cui and sui which ought to be kept in one sound in all words, as in verbum, deum, ipsum, sunt, etc. The only sound for vowels of all the five, wherein the Italians and Germans do continue them universally through all their speech or writing {I3} is even as we use them in the foresaid last examples have Adam etc. As the Italian doth sound them in this one word riputatione, and as the Spaniard doth use them all, but the u which he abuseth with us and the Scottish, but not generally as the French do. And the Dutch as in the first sentence of the foresaid Gospel of Saint Johnm Im anfang was das wort, vnd das wort was bey Gott vnd Gott was das selbig wort, where they are all sounded as through all their speech as the Italians do, and as the Spaniard and we do often. But for consonants I must confess the Italian and German with us, the French and Spaniards do abuse the u, yet the Almain never or seldom writeth the figure u for consonant, but (with the Welsh) thus v, and by negligence useth the same also for vowel as in vnd, but not before any vowel, where it might be taken for a consonant. And for the consonant i, the Italian hath found it so unmeet as he hath provided for it the use of gi, as is said.

Thus, trusting that you be certified of {n. p.} the ancient and due sounds of the five vowels (I find not that we shall need any more) wherein only we ought to use them, and so as when two or three of them may come together, the same and none other sound of each must appear; but that the sound must be longer or in a higher tune of the last than the first, or the two first, if it be in a triphthong, that is, of three sounds. Which come in our speech but seldom, but the diphthong very often. And everyone may join with any one of her other four fellows, and be made a double sound as is said in one syllable, yet two vowels may also come together, and the first have her full sound as well as the latter, but then they make two syllables, for the knowledge whereof I do use over the latter vowel two pricks received in both Greek and Latin  dyaeresis thus ¨. The high Dutch, not using always one figure for the vowel and another for the consonant of the u, do use (as we from them) the double w before each one of the other vowels in diphthong, for which the Italian, French, {n. p.} and Spanish do use to write the g before u, to cause the reader to be certain that the v is no consonant. The Dutch do use also au, ei and ie rightly as I do hereafter, and  ả in the sound of ae or e long;  ỏ in sound oe or eu;  ü in the sound of iu or the French and Scottish u;  ủ for eu; and  ů for u long or French ou, with other vowels before and after them, which figures, if need were, we mought have borrowed, but are ancipital and doubtful for the reader, which is not in those hereafter, where each vowel is seen for herself as they are used in speech. And so, using the i always vowel, as is said, we shall never need the  y, whereunto we give the very sound of i or ei; nor the  w, for that I will also use one figure for the consonant and th’other for the vowel, and the prick under for the longer sound. And for diphthongs and triphthongs, I need to give none examples in this place, but do defer them till I have showed you the figures and names of all our sounds and breaths. And in the meantime, I will give you to understand {n. p.} which (of such as we do now use) we do usurp for some of them, and which we do rightly use, and give you examples of them, as is done of the vowels.

The Number of Consonants and Breathes Which We Use in our Speech, with the Leaving of Superfluous Letters, and Receiving of such Other as we Need, with Example of their Right Use

Chapter V

I find that we do use twelve divers dumb or dull sounds in our speech, coming from the breast with a breath as it were groaningly, diversified either by touching of the lips together, or of the under lip to the upper teeth, or of the tongue to the palate, to the upper great teeth or gums, or to the upper fore-teeth; whereof seven of them have as many fellows or sisters, and may be so called, for that they are shaped in the mouth in one self manner and fashion, differing only by leaving of {K1} the inward sound and use but of the breath, so as the one mought be allowed to stand in place and passe musters for her fellow even as the females (of the nearest like unto the males) of any kind mought for the males, or contrarywise. The one couple or pair is the  b and  p. Another is the  v consonant and  f. Then  g and  k, or c, as before a, o and u, which c, seeing the k is so well known as it is, I had as thief be beholding to the Greek for their  k, as to the Latin for their c, and to use the c with a a differing note for the sound of ch, for it is not the proper office of h to serve in that sort, nor as we do with t and with s, for so every consonant is aspired and breathed; and no sound can be made in man breast without his breath though it be kept in, as for b, g, d and m, though a man do stop his nose and keep in his breath, yet he may make the inward sound of them, which is by the meane of his breath. And the consonants may all be framed and uttered sensibly to the hear without the naming of any vowel or diphthong, the manner whereof I can {n. p.} not so well express by writing as by mouth, but the nearest I may I shall write hereafter. And we must be careful to sound the  g as the Grecians do gamma, the Hebrews guimel, as the English Saxons did and yet is used in all Dutchland over and nether, and kept of the Brutes or Welsh unto this day, that is before e and i, as before a, o and u, as we also often rightly do; as in this sentence, “Leave your anger, and give me your girdle to get this together”: for which only sound I shall always use the g, without any need of the h betwixt the g and e or i, as the Fleming doth. And for the sound of the j consonant, for which the Italian doth use gi, to be served according to our need, we must take a new figure, for which Sir Thomas Smith hath chosen the English Saxon J and I do use the same hereafter, a little diversifying the shape to differ more from g, and to be readier for the hand to write, thus  𝒿: for which we mought have used this mark j but the other is better, for that it needeth no prick over it (which is the note of the i), {K2} to be the better known before or after or betwixt m and n. And for the sound of the k I find no fault. The fellow or sister of 𝒿 is the sound of the Italian c before e and i, and of our and the Spanish most common sound of ch. For which the high Dutch do write tsch, as in Teutsch, Teutscher, geherscht and Verdolmetscht. For which there mought be used as we have accustomed the ch, but that the truth is, as also Sir Thomas Smith saith, the h is in that sort much abused, for which sound of ch he alloweth the c before and after all vowels and diphthongs alike, and doth declare it to be the ancient sound of c; but because it hath been so long and yet is of many nations with us abused in two sounds, I think it better to receive some other figure, for which I have turned my pen (as for the others hereafter) divers ways, as thus ch, tc, and  ɕ, which last I find the readiest for the hand and to join with the following letters best. Fifthly, this couple  d and  t, which we use tightly in reading English most commonly but many do abuse {n. p.} them in reading Latin in certain words in the sound of the following couple, as is said at the beginning of the grammar, and shall be said in my new manner. Sixthly we have a pair of sounds for which we do usurp the th alone, which I, with Sir Thomas Smith, do leave and use for each one a divers figure: and whereas he useth for them the English Saxon letters called the thorne d, thus ð, or the Greek Δ for thone, and Greek θ, or Saxon þ for th’other, I have followed the readiness of the hand, as is said for the 𝒿 and ɕ, and have devised for this couple  ɗ, for the thorne d or dh, and  ƥ for th. And the other pair which we have is the  ɀ, and  s, and some think the sh should be the s aspired, which I could not well avoid, if I had not narrowly considered and found the ɀ, and s to be shapen in one sort, which is with thrusting the tongue to the palate and teeth or gums forward, so as the first is then sounded with a soft breath through the upper fore-teeth, and her fellow without any sound and with a harder breath, {K3} observing th’order of all the six other pairs,  whereas the hushing of this breath is made through the teeth only and taking of the tongue from the palate, and drawing it inward to the upper gums or teeth, which you may perceive by closing your teeth together and so thrusting forth of your breath hard; or by biting your under or upper lip and thrusting your breath through your teeth, and so this breath is perfectly made. By which doings you may find that the ɀ nor s cannot be made but by touching of the tongue to the palate. For the fellow of which sh, th French do sound their g before e and i, and the j consonant before a, o and u, and sometimes before e, and do never sound perfectly our sounds beforesaid for 𝒿 and ɕ in all their speech. For which sh I have framed a new figure, with like regard for the shortness and easiness for the writing as for the rest beforesaid, and is thus  δ. Then we have four sounds of the liquids or semivocals  l, m, n and r, of which I must needs confess, as of some others before, to be rightly used in sound {n. p.} when they be single. We have further the l aspired like to the Spanish and Welsh often use of the ll, which maketh the twelfth dumb or dull sound, but we use it not that I know of at the beginning of any words as they do, but often at th’end of words, as in this sentence: “The betle is hable to fable”. Where we wrest the e, which is but closely or (as it were) half sounded, wherefore we may with as small cost and labour, as of the rest, use a fit figure for it, and never need to use the ll or lh; and for the reasons abovesaid not to abuse the h, but as I have in the other consonants aspired used the least draught of the pen, I could to signify that aspiration, that is for the ch, dh, th, and sh. So will I do the like for this lh, as thus,  ժ. Whereunto the following letters may well join and the difference sufficient. Further, we abuse the name of  h, calling it ache, which sound serveth very well to express a headache, or some bone ache, whose property is to signify only the breath without any mean of instrument or sound as we use it before and after the {n. p.} sound of the vowel in laughing hah or heh, as when we laugh we bring out our breath so hah, hah, hah or heh, heh, heh, where the h hath no sound but as you would blow to warm your hands, for the sound thereof is showed by the vowel. And for that we do use to write so many divers secretary hands, amongst which there hath not yet one been framed to be put in print, and seeing the italic letters much written and printed amongst us, I do hereafter use them and do find them as easy and swift for the hand and eye as any other letter, howbeit there are many in divers nations do write their accustomed hand very swiftly, whereof much use is only the cause, but none so general and thoroughly easy for the eye and hand as the italic. And for the new figures, which I have devised conformable to the course of the hand and fit for the print, no man needeth to be offended, whoso liketh them not may leave them. Yet who can let me to think of him otherwise than as of a man which liketh best to be partly naked and wilfully refuseth {n. p.} convenient and fit clothes to furnish the want of his couverture and yet is content to have some part double or treble furnished, with none other reason than because he hath been brought up in it and is the use of his country, whereas, if the superfluous attire were bestowed on that other part which wanted, he should be no more burthened than before. Even so our number of figures or letters shall be no more than before, but shaped to better purpose, leaving all superfluity and taking what need is, as is partly said. For you may see (and you shall find that we need them not) I have left y and w wholly. To the c I have given an addition for ch. The j consonant and q I leave also as wholly superfluous. So are  the long s and this figure r, for that one figure for one sound is sufficient, except we would have store, as is used of men in battle or for wives when one husband is dead, another to dwell in the place; but we see there needeth no such supply in letters. Further, for the right  placing of h, I am not so much bound to custom but {L1} that I may write it as we use it in speech, as for these words, “what”, “when” and “where” I do write, huat, huen and huẹr, and all such like.

I leave also all double consonants; having a mark for the long vowel, there is thereby sufficient knowledge given that every unmarked vowel is short. Yet, whereas by custom of double consonants there may be doubt of the length, we may use the mark over it of  the acute tone or tune, thus ˊ

Also I find it as reasonable for us to use  the abridgement di for “half”, ք for our “by”, and ᵱ for our “for”, as 𝔈 for “and”, or any other abridgement, wherein no letter of the syllable is showed but seeing  &, or 𝔈, is so universally used, I leave it as I find it; so do I the  x, for that it is in likewise used universally in counting for ten, but for voice it may be expressed with ks, which I will often use for it, seeking to eschew diversity of figures. The like may be said of li for “pound”, d. for “penny”, ob for “halfpenny”, and q. for “farthing”, but in s for “shilling” is some reason of which, {n. p.} whatsoever I write or say, I know every man will use as him best liketh. But for my part in the former abridgements and such like, seeing they vary from the office and right use of letters, I will write the syllables at length, except it be when I would write by ciphering; but for the rest last mentioned, I will use them with the multitude and the more willing, for that they serve in matter of numbering and naming of kinds of money, wherewith none commonly deal other than such as are capable, quickly to learn the said accustomed figures.

Accordingly will I set them in order, with their names and examples of their sounds, whereof I begin to write in the next chapter, and so continue all the rest of this work; wherewith, although that which is said may satisfy the benevolent, yet the taste of some other will be so altered, as the rest will be right loathsome unto them and grieve them to look thereo, by the strangeness thereof; unto which pain (seeing pleasure is painful unto them) I do drive them if they will {L2} understand the same, by the experience whereof some of them may peradventure find such savour as they may change their mood. And for that the figures and sounds of the vowels are prescribed, here followeth a table of the consonants and breathes, with a declaration of their proper use and sound by this our present manner of writing, for such doubtful words as are therein written in my following new manner.

Thus, I find in our speech the first of each of the seven pair figured by b, v, g, 𝒿, d, ɗ, and ɀ, with the four liquids or semivocals l, m, n, r and the ժ to have the dull, dumb, inward or groaning sound of the breast, and the latter of each of the seven pairs never to be sounded (but only breathed) otherwise then by the help of the vowel or semivocal, and are p, f, k, ɕ, t, ƥ and s; and the two other aspirations or breathes, th’one blowen through the teeth and th’other freely without any stop from the breast, and are figured δ and h. So there are twelve dumb divers sounds, nine diverse breathes, and the five vowels, which make in all twenty-six and I find not that we need any more simple figures. {n. p.}

Of the Accidents unto Vowels, to Weet Time, Tune and Breath, with Diphthongs and Triphthongs, and an Order of Distinction and Pointing Used Thereafter

Chapter VI

Now for the quantity of each of the vowels, which is an accident to the voice, to give knowledge when the vowel shall be longer in the same sound, one mark for that length may serve well for all and every one of them, for which – as is said – I use a prick under each, as thus ạ ẹ ị ọ ụ. And when the following consonant is to be harder sounded than accustomed (for which we now use to double them), the note of the acute upon the preceding vowel may fitly serve as is said Folio 36; and when two vowels may come together and by the speech are found in two syllables, the figure of division called dyaeresis may serve well, as is said, Folio 35; which I do also use, and of the {L4} breathes, Folio 34 and 35. Now will I show you examples of the diphthongs made of two short vowels, and of others of one short and of another long. And then of triphthongs. With short vowels, as thus:  ui uil reid bei ionder uél, huẹr ɗe uat uas uel nẹr tạkn bei ɗe iung hound) which is written for “we will ride by yonder well where the wat was well near taken by the young hound”, which do come very often in our speech. 

 Of diphthongs whereof one vowel is short and the other long, as: iụ uẹr uạkịng in ɗe fourƥ toụr, huẹr aɀ ɗe buẹ did poụr uạter upón ɗe huẹt floụr, which I write for “you were waking in the fourth tower, when as the boy did pour water upon the wheat flour”, which also do come very often. And for triphthongs, as bi  ueiɀ ov ɗe hueiɀ buei for “be wise of the hoyes bowy”; and hark ɗe kat dụƥ  mieu  hueilɀ iụ milk ɗe ieu, for “hark the cat doth mew, whiles you milk the ewe”. And a basin and  eaur, for “ewer”, and certain others as will be seen hereafter. And for three vowels coming together and making {n. p.} two syllables as in example:  ɗe viuër sẹƥ siuër it is piuër, for “the viewer saith sure it is pure”; and as in these words:  ɗis beiër iɀ heiër ov pouër ɗen ɗe deiër bei hiɀ feiër, for “this boor is higher of power than the dyer by his fire”. And so of others when they shall come in place hereafter, and for the  apostrophe and  conjunction of half words, or of divers words which shall be sounded together, their use is common.

At last, to be ready to enter into my new manner of writing, I will briefly write of distinction or pointing, which (well observed) may yield the matter, much the readier to the senses, as well to the eye as to the ear. For it showeth us how to rest; when the sentence continueth, and when it endeth; how to understand what is written and is not needeful to the sentence; what some translator or new writer of a work doth add more than the author did at first write; and also what sentence is asking and what is wondering. Their number is seven, whose figures follow. The first marked thus , the Greeks call comma, for which the {M1} Latins and other vulgares have used a strike thus / or thus, ∕ and called it incisum, and is in reading the shortest rest, near the time of a crotchet in music, always signifying the sentence unfinished, which we commonly now mark  thus , . For that the use thereof is so often to be seen, I forbear to give you any other example thereof. 

The second marked  thus : the Greeks call colon, which the Latins interpret artus membrorum or internodium, which is the space, or the bone, flesh and skin betwixt two joints. And so, accompting a full sentence as a complete body, these two pricks may well signify a great part thereof :, as of the body may be taken from the ancle joint to the knee, and from the knee to the huckle or buttock joint. And knowing thereby that there is more to come, whereas the other first rest or comma doth but in manner devide the small parts (betwixt the joints) of the hands and feet.

And the last of these three is a prick  thus . to signify the end of a full and {n. p.} perfect sentence, as the head and feet are the extreme ends of a body, which prick the Greeks and Latins with many other nations doe use; and the sentence before it, they call periodus that is in Latin circuitus vel ambitus, and after some compregentio, and we sentence after which we use to begin with a great letter. Anyone of the other four marks, although they may be for perfect sentences, yet may they be put within other longer sentences. As  the parentheseos, which Greek word understand to be a putting in, or an addition of some other matter by the way, which being left out yet the sentence remaineth good. And note that it may be put in any part of the sentence, except it be at the beginning or end. And the said parentheses are most so short as there doth seldom chance in it any other of the three foresaid points. Sometimes the right half circle is used of the translator to signify his exposition or gloss upon some word or sentence, and some do use both for that purpose; whereby {M2} it is to be known to be the translator’s mind and not the author’s. And then they be not used for interposition of sentence, for which use the two last hereunder are most used. The use of the parenthesis is so well known as I need to give none example of it. No more do I of the interrogative or admirative, but that they are most full sentences of themselves, and therefore are also marked with the full sentence point or prick in the line, adding thereto  for asking above the line thus ? and  for wondering thus ! And for the mark of the interrogative and admirative I would think it more reasonable to use them before then after, because their tunes do differ from our other manner of pronunciation at the beginning of the sentence. Which I thought good to remember, but to use them as they are received, seeing the matter is of no great moment. There resteth yet to say somewhat of these last pair [ ], which differ from the propriety of the parenthesis for it is never used of the author, and first writer of any matter, but in translations, commentaries {n. p.} and expositions: in translations, as is said above of the figures of interposition, when as they have no force of parenthesis in expositions and commentaries contrarywise the writer noteth the text (whether it be word or sentence) some with both, others with the right half, then following he writeth his commentary or exposition. Thus to your twelve figures for your divers dumb sounds and seven divers breathed consonants, and two simple breathes, with your five vowels each short or sharp, or long when it is so sounded with the diphthongs and triphthongs which may come of them, with the other accents and distinctions or pointing before particularly (though briefly) declared. And using all accordingly, I think every reasonable man – yea, I mought say, child or youth that can read and doth understand that which is before said – may assuredly, without any occasion of doubt, read all that which followeth.

I would gladly have had letters for the capitals, greater and thicker than those hereafter, always of one sort and making, {M3} for want whereof for this impression I do use a strike before them. Which I have done for the young and new learners behoof, for that I would not their eyes should be troubled with two figures differing in shape, for any one simple voice, sound, or breath, when as one may suffice, and much less for so many.

Now some such as have well considered the premisses may think my meaning to be good, and yet cannot be persuaded my purpose should ever be so profitable as I have promised in my preface, for that the present manner is so plentifully spread, and that in great volumes, and is universally received and well liked of, as it should be a marvellous labour and charge to allow a new manner. And, therefore, it is the most profitable to be contented with the old. That is, say I, because no better nor more certain order hath been hitherto laid before them. These men mean to be content with acorns as their predecessors were, contenting themselves with hides and fells for their clothing, and aprons to gather {n. p.} their acorns in, and dwell in their dens, rather than to fell the wood, and make them houses therewith, to stoke up the roots and make the ground arable, to plough the ground and sow and reap good corn. And therefore, I say, how long soever our predecessors have used our present manner, when we do not receive and enjoy thereby the benefit of a perfect writing, but contrarywise do find great disorders in it, (as it hath appeared) we should rather embrace than repugn the better and more profitable, and be ashamed of our former rudeness: for in amendment of anything it is better late than never.

{n. p.}

An exersịɀ ov ɗat huiɕ iɀ sẹd: huẹr-in iɀ declạrd, hou ɗe rest ov ɗe consonants arm ạd bei ɗinstruments ov ɗe mouƥ: hiuɕ uaɀ omitted in ɗe premiseɀ, for ɗat ui did not muɕ abiuɀ ɗem. Cap. Vị

In ɗis tịtժ abuv-uritn, ei konsider ov ɗeị, in exersịɀ, & ov ɗe u, in instruments: ɗe leik ov ɗe ị, in tịtժ, huiɕ ɗe kómon man, and mani lernd, dụ SSound in ɗe diphƥongs ei, and iu: iet ei uld not ƥink it mịt to ureit ɗem, in dọɀ and leik Uurds, huẹr ɗe sound ov ɗe voël Oonlli, mẹ bi as uel álouëd in our spịɕ, as ɗat ov ɗe diphƥong iuɀd ovɗe riud: and so fár ei álou observasion for derivasions. ∾ /hierbei iu mẹ persẹv, ɗat our singժ sounding and ius of letters, mẹ in proses ov teim, bring our họl nasion tu ọn serten, perfet and Jjeneral spẹking. ∾ /huer-in δi must bi riuled bei ɗe lernd from teim tu teim. ∾ /and ei kan not blạm ani man tu ƥink ɗis maner ov niu ureiting stran𝒿, for ei du konfés it iɀ stran𝒿 tu mei self, ɗob befọr {n. p.} ei hạv ended ɗe ureiting, and iu ɗe rịding ov ɗiɀ bụk, ei dout not bọd iu and ei δal ƥink our lạburs uel bestoëd. ∾ /and not-uiɗ-standing ɗat ei hạv devịɀd ɗis niu maner ov ureiting for our /ingliδ, ei miẹn not ɗat /latin δuld bi-uritn in ɗeɀ leters, no mọR ɗen ɗe /grịkọr /hebriu, nẹɗer uld ei ureit t’ani man ov anu stran𝒿 nasion in ɗeɀ léurs, but huen aɀ ei-uld gladli konterfet hiɀ spịɕ uiɗ mei tung, so-uld ei hiɀ ureiting uiɗ mei hand. ∾ /iet huo kuld let mi t’iuɀ mei pén ɗe best ei kuld, ɗerbei t’átẹn ɗe sụner tu ɗe perfet pronunsiasion, ov ani stran𝒿 spịɕ: but ureiting /ingliδ, ui mẹ (aɀ is sẹd) iuɀ for evri stran𝒿 ụrd, ɗe sạm marks or léters ov ɗe voises huiɕ ui du feind in spịɕ, uiɗout ani-uɗer regard tu δiọ bei-ureiting huens ɗe-ụrd iɀ boroëd, ɗen aɀ ui du-in spẹking. ∾ /for suɕ kurioɀite in superflụɀ léters, for derivasion or diferens, and so furƥ, iɀ ɗe disordring and konfounding, ov ani-ureiting: kontrari tu ɗe lau-ov ɗe perfeksion ɗerof, and agenst aul rẹɀon: huer-bei, it δuld bi obedient untu ɗe pronunsiasion, aɀ tu hir lạdi-and mistres: and so, ád or diminiδ aɀ δi δaul in suksés ov teim kómaund. ∾ /furɗer bi-iu {N1} aɗvertiɀed, ɗat ei mẹ oftn iuɀ bọɗ ɗe feluɀ or sisters ov ọn pẹr, in ọn ụrd, at ọn teim ɗ’ọn, and at an-uɗer teim ɗ’uɗer. ∾ /aɀ for exāpժ in ɗis hiuɕ ei hạv hier-befọr uritn, in ɗis ụrd ius, uiɗ s, and hạv uritn ɗe sạm ụrd aulso, uiɗ hir felụɀ, so hạv ei dụn ui’ ɗ’artikժ ov and of. For ɗat ui du-iuɀ ɗem so in spịɕ. ∾ /hier, bei ɗeksampժ ov ɗ’ /hẹbriu dagheɀing and rapheïng, ov six ov ɗẹr konsonants, and priking ov ɗe riht or left seid ov ɗẹr léter /sin, iɀ noted ɗe dubժ ius ov our sẹd 7. pẹrɀ of felu konsonants, and ɗoh it bi not in ɗe sạm sort, aɀ it tạk it: for our díferens iɀ tu kno huen ɗ’ọn haƥ ɗ’inuard sound and ɗ’uɗer not: and ɗẹrɀ, iSS huen ɗ’ọn iɀ harder brẹɗd ɗan ɗ’uɗer, aɀ mẹ bi from our b, and bh, if ui-iuɀd it: ov ɗe g, soft, and ɗe gh aspịrd, aɀ ɗe /fleming duɗ iuɀ it: from our d, and dh, in suɕ-ueiɀ aɀ is sẹd hier-after ov ɗe ph: our and ɗe /grịk, from ch. and x. p, from ph, not aɀ ui-and ɗe modern /grịks du-in ɗe sound ov f, huiɕ if ɗe hih /duɕ had found gụd, ɗẹ kuld as uel hạv iuɀd ph, aɀ pf, in pfund for our poūd: but if ɗe had tạkn ɗe h, ɗẹ-uld hạv brẹɗd it in ɗis plạs, as ɗe du-auluẹɀ: huiɕ iɀ aɀ ui muht for pound in ɗis ueiɀ p-hound: so ɗe ureit pfeiff for a fliut or peip, huiɕ if it had bein uritn {n. p.} uiɗ ph, ɗẹ uld hạv soūded it aɀ muht bi p-heiff: so for oepffel, æp-hel offen, ọp-hen: pflaum, p-hlaum: pfennig, p-hennig: in huiɕ ụrds ui in /ingliδ, hạving δạpt ɗem uiɗout ɗe f, or h, iet ui brẹd ɗe h, softli and sẹ: p-heip, ap-hel, p-hlum, ọp-hen and p-héni: ov ɗe t, from th, aɀ ui-iuɀ th, in ɗe river ov /thạms, /thomas and /sathan, aɀ ɗe /ualδ du-aluẹɀ iuɀ it: and ɗe /duɕ in ɗẹɀ ụrds ɀům theil theủr, thor and thün, in /ingliδ sum dẹl diër, dọr and dụn: huiɕ, ar never konfounded in ɗe sound or breƥ ov eɗer ɗ, or ƥ. ∾ ɗ’/hebrius fọr-sẹd daghes iɀ a prik in ɗe bodi-ov ɗe léter, iu gịv ɗe knọle𝒿 ov a harder, and raphe a litժ lein ọvr-ot for ɗe softer sound. ∾ /ei remember ɗat sum ov our grámarians for ɗe present mihi, and nihil, did ureit michi and nichil, and so sounded ch, in ɗe sound ov ɕ, aɀ ei aulso remember ɗe /frenδ did in δ, huiɕ bọɗ ui, and ɗe hạv uel left preɀentlei. ∾ /and huer-aɀ ɗe béter lerned sort hạv iuɀd ch, in /michaelmas, aɀ’t-uẹr uritn uiɗ kh, or k, alọn, aɀ abụv: in mani plạses ov /ingland ɗe kuntreman iɀ ákustumed tụ sẹ for ɗe quarter ɗẹ /miɕelmas: and iet hi-uil kaul hiɀ kompanion /mihel. ∾ /and so ɗe /norɗren man {N2} seɀ mikl for our miɕ or muɕ, kirk for ɕurɕ, and suɕ leik. ∾ /hier-bei’t-iɀ evident ɗat ni abiuɀ ɗe h, tu mạk it serv so diverslei uiɗ konsonants aɀ ui dụ, huiɕ (aɀ iɀ bifọr-sẹd ov ɗe voëls) ui-ar konstrẹnd tu du, hạving no several léters for ɗoɀ konsonant sounds: huiɕ ui-iuɀ in our spịɕ, huiɕ sounds ɗe /latins never had, nor ɗe /duɕ, nor /frenδ, nor ɗ’/italian. ∾ /for ɗe /latin, from huom ɗe sẹd nasions uiɗ vs, du bọr’ our léters. AEneas Silvius in his treatis de liberorum educatione, uẹr ɗe láter end, ureiting de aspiratione sẹƥ: Apud Latinos nulla consona aspiratur. /and a litժ after hi noteƥ ɗat iiij. ar iuɀd tu b’aspịrd in /grịk ụrds, to uịt c, p, r, t, aɀ Chremes, Philosophus, Rhetor, and Thraso. and uɗer derivasions ov ɗe /grịk: and dụƥ aulso ɗẹr nọt, ɗat ɗe /latins uẹr not skrupelus in observing ov derivasion, aɀ mei kontrarieɀ uld hạv us, aɀ Filius, Fama, and Fere, ɗẹ hạv aluẹɀuritn uiɗ f, ɗoh ɗẹ bi derịvd from ɗe /grịk. /ɗe leik iɀ ɗer in Annotationes Ioachimi Camerarii, Iohannis Sichardi, aliorumque doctissimorum in utraque lingua virorum upon Quintilian, {n. p.} in an imprésion at Basil bei Robert Winter in Anno, 1543. In ɗe first bụk in ɗe feivƥ ɕapter, de literis et eorum potestate, sub litera e. Et f, litera utimur pro aspirato: quae enim Graeci per φ, enunciarunt, Latini per f, maluerunt: ut fama, fagus, fur, afer. Quae igitur Graeci inquit, aspirate pronunciarunt, nos quidem non aspirate dicimus, sed tamen consimiliter. ∾ /ɗ’understanding huer of mẹ litժ profit ani-uɗer ɗen ɗe /grámarian, huerfọr ei du not ingliδ it. ∾ /and ɗen folụeƥ ɗis sentens: Docuit enim et Priscianus, inter f, et φ, proferendum differentiam esse etc. ut Burrhus pro Pyrrho, Bruges pro Phrygibus, Balaena pro Phalena. ∾ / huiɕ ſignifeiëƥ: and Priscian triuli tauht, ɗat ɗer iɀ a diferens in pronunsiasion betuikst f, and ph, and so furƥ, aɀ Burrhus, for Pyrrho, Bruges for ɗe Phrygians, Balaena for Phalaena. ∾ /and Quintilian resiteƥ ɗẹr in ɗe text ɗat Cicero lauht a grịk ọn tu skorn in spẹking Fundanio, for ɗat hi kụld not pronouns ɗe first léter ov ɗ’ụrd aɀ ɗe /latins did. ∾ /huer-bei in mẹ persẹv ɗ’aunsient /latins {N3} urạt aɀ ɗẹ spạk and understụd ɗe /grịks aspịring of p, tu bi nẹr leik aɀ ui muht aspịr b, and ɗerfọr urạt ɗȯɀ ụrds uiɗ b, ɗoh ɗe /grịks urạt ɗem uiɗ ph. ∾ /for ɗe riht sound ov p, brẹɗd, kan not bi diskreibd in /ingliδ ákụstumed ureiting, for ɗat ui-iuɀ ɗe f, for ɗ’abiuɀd sound ɗerof, and kontrari-ueiɀ du sound ph, in /grịk ụrds in ɗe sạm sound iu-iuɀ ɗ’f, huiɕ duɗ ápịr (bei ɗat is sẹd) oht not tu bi so sounded: but brẹɗd aɀ in ɗe /duɕ examples befọr ∾ /and ɗohei hạv δeuëd in hier-befọr hou-ui du-iuɀ ɗe t, brẹɗd in /thạms, /thomas, and /sathan, iet ei-uil sẹ som-huat mọr ɗerof in ɗis plạs, ɗe /latins in translating ov /grịk ụrds for ɗẹr ius, hạv put θ intu boɗ t, and d, as ϑρίαμβος triumhphus, ϑἑος deus, ϑεα dea: but du-iuɀ th, aɀ in Thema, Thesis, Thermopola, and mani-uɗer suɕ ụrds aɀ ɗẹ bọr’ ov ɗe /grịks. ∾ /and ui-iuɀ tu brẹɗ it riht also-in ɗeɀ ụrds of thůni fiδ, herb theim, medesin thriakժ, thrẹɀiur and thron, in huiɕ aɀ in ɗe abụv-sẹd /thạms, /thomas, and /sathan, ui-iuɀ it aɀ du-aul /duɕland over and neɗer, and aɀ du ɗ’/italian, /frenδ, and /spaniard, non ov ɗem having ɗọɀ sounds in aul ɗẹr spịɕes hụiɕ ui {n. p.} hạv givn tu th, nor never had ɗe /latins ɗem, ɗerfọr hou kụld ui-ureit ɗem ui’ ɗe /latin léters, iet our predesésors abiuɀd ɗe d, in as, and aul ɗe kompounds ɗerof in ɗe sound ov ɗ, eksept ɗ’ụrd huer-uiɗ it iɀ kompounded began uiɗ d, aɀ dico, and duco, in suɕ ɗe foloïng d, did konstrẹn ɗem tu scund ɗe t, in ɗe sound ov ƥ, in ɗe ƥird persons singuler ov aul verbs aktivɀ and neuters ending in t, uiɗ a voel befọr it: and for d, in apud, ɗe t, in caput, etc. aɀ iɀ plẹnli sẹd in ɗ’orthographi ov ɗe grámer, huiɕ not-uiɗ-standing ei fẹr mi, sum of mein elders bịing broht up ɗerin: uil ƥink ɗẹ kan not spẹk béter nou ɗen ɗẹ did huen ɗẹ-uẹr iung, espesiälei ɗat huiɕ ɗẹ lernd in ɗẹ grámers skụl: but huat! Iu meƥink ei-am nou forƥ ov mei máter, tu ureit ov spẹking, huer-as ei purpọɀd but tu δio hou-ui muht most fitli ureit ɗat ƥing ui spẹk! So ei du, ɗoh ei-ureit hier ov ɗ’il spẹking ov /latin, in suɕ ov our /ingliδ sounds aɀ ɗe /latins nor no nasion els (tu mei knole𝒿) but ɗe /ualδ (from huom it must nịds bi, our predesésors hạv lernd ɗem) and our /ingliδ /gresians du-iuɀ. ∾ /nou for ɗe brẹɗing ov c, (for huiɕ ei iuɀ ɕ) ui abiuɀ {N4} muɕ, but hạv iuɀd rihtli-oftn aɀ in ɗe nạms ov Cham, Chanahan, Chrysostom, Charybdis, and in ɗẹɀ ụrds, chronikժ, chart ov a kuntrẹ, choler, a karia𝒿 chart, a chandժ, a chamel, ɗe herb sichore, and mani-ụɗer, and aɀ aul Duɕ-land, and ɗe /florentein du-iuɀ it auluẹɀ. ∾ /huiɕ sound ov ɕ, ɗe /italian and hih /duɕ and /spaniard hạv, aɀ is sẹd, and δaul-bi in ɗe nekst ɕapter: but ɗe /frenδ in mani ụrds huer-in ɗ’ori𝒿inal /latin iɀ uritn uiɗ c, ɗẹ ureit ch, sounding it aɀ our sh, huer-aɀ ui du kịp ɗe sound ch, aɀ ei hạv abuv-sẹd, or of k, aɀ Campus ui sẹ kamp, and ɗe /frenδ, δaump: Cattus, a kát, ung δat: Caules, kọlụrts, in /frenδ shoulx: Capus, a kạpn, shappon: Carbo, kọl, sharbon: Castellum, kastժ, shạteau: Caldarium, a kauderon or kétժ, shaudiere. ∾ /iet ov lạt sum ov ɗem hạv espeid ɗ’éror, and hạv deveiɀd tu boro ɗe spaniδ c, uiɗ an s, vnder, ɗus ç. and oftn, ui hạv turnd ɗe /latin c, intu ɗe sound ov ɕ, aɀ Castus, ɕast: castigatio, ɕastiɀing, caseus, ɕịɀ: capitulum, ɕapter: cantor, a ɕaunter: cantio, an inɕauntment: cancellarius, a ɕauncelour: cambio, ei ɕạn𝒿: capella, a ɕápel: camerarius, a {n. p.} ɕamberlain: cerasus, a ɕeritrị: cerasum, a ɕeri: cathedra, a ɕẹr: huiɕ ɗe /frenδ turn intu sh, as ɗe rest: eksept it bi for ɕịɀ, huich ɗẹ hạv not derịvd from /latin, but kaul it /forma𝒿e ∾ /and hier iɀ tu bi noted, bei huat reɀon ui sẹ-and ureit, kart, karter, kamel, and kandel, and iet ụrds derivd from ɗem, ui-alter intu ɗe sound of ɕ, aɀ in ɕariot, ɕar-koժ, ɕamlet and ɕaundier: huer-in mi ƥinks uẹr sum profit tu kịp ɗe sound ov ɗẹr primitivs, sịing ɗ etimologi ov ɗe ụrd muht ɗe beter bi knọn ɗer-bei, if derivasion uẹr so nịdful tu bi kept aɀ sum du ƥink. ∾ /and for ɗat ɗe kómon ius iɀ tu-ureit, kart, kandժ, kamel and karter uiɗ k, or c, uiɗout ɗe h, ei mẹ turn ɗẹr oun en𝒿in agenst ɗem-selvs, and feind faut in ɗat ɗẹ ureit not aɀ ɗ’ori𝒿inal ụrds ar, tu gịv mi knọle𝒿 huens ɗe ụrd iɀ derivd. ∾ /and ɗat muht ɗẹ uel dụ it ɗe c, uẹr aspịrd, aɀ is sẹd in Cham, Chanahan, and choler etc. /huiɕ iɀ noƥing nẹr ɗe sound ov out most kómon abius ov ch, huer-fọr ei hạv deveiɀd ɕ ∾ /ɗus ei trust iu-under-stand súfisientlei hou rẹɀonabժ it iɀ, tu-iuɀ ɗe léter ov ɗe breƥ h, onli bifọr and after voelɀ and suɕ sounds aɀ ar mạd onli-ov ɗem: and for ɗe kómoditi huiɕ (bei ɗis teim iu mẹ {O1} si) ɗer mẹ kum tu ɗe living ov our nasion and our posteriti, bei resẹving ov so mani léters aɀ ui-iuɀ voises, sounds or brẹɗs and iuɀing ɗem auluẹɀ in ɗẹr proper and pekulier ófises, iu uil not bi so muɕ ófended at ɗis invension, aɀ peradventiur iu uẹr ar first opening ov ɗe bụk. ∾ /and for mei lẹving ov serten léters huer-of ui had. Ij. δạps for ọn sound, aɀ ɗIS 𝔯, & long ſ, and often x, ui sị hueɗer ui bi súfisiētlei servd uiɗout ɗem or not. ∾ /hiuɕ exsés ov sum léters, and uant ov uɗers, Priscian noted in ureting ov ɗe aksidents ov léters, huer hị sëƥ, Authoritas quoque tam Varronis quam Macri, teste Censorino, nec k, nec q, neque h, in numero adhibet literarum. Videntur tamen et i, u, cum in consonantes transeunt, quantum ad potestatem, quod maximum est in elementis, aliae literae essee praeter supradictas. Multum enim interest, utrum vocales sint an consonantes: sicut enim, quamvis in varia figura, et vario nomine sint k, et q, et c, tamen quia unam vim habent tam in metro, quam in sono, pro una litera accipi debent: sic i, et u, quamvis unum nomen et unam habent figuram, tam {n. p.} vocales quam consonantes, tamen quia diversum sonum, et diversam vim habent in metris, et in pronuntione syllabarum, non sint in eisdem (meo iudicio) elements accipiendae. ∾ /and so hi prosịdeth δeuïng ɗe díferens betuixt ɗe voël and ɗe konsonant. ∾ /huer-bei iu mẹ sị, hị (nor ɗọɀ autours befọr him) did ákount noɗer k, nor q, nor h, in ɗe number ov ɗe /latin alphabet, and deklạrd plẹnli ɗat huen i, and u, uẹr mạd konsonants ɗẹ sịmd tu bi-uɗer léters, (touɕing ɗẹr pouërs, huiɕ iɀ ɗe ɕịfest in elements) ɗen ɗ’abụv-sẹd, tu uịt ɗen voëls. ∾ /and kompạrs ɗat leik aɀ k, q, and c, hạv divers δạps and nạms, and hạv but ọn pouër, aɀ-uel in mịter aɀ in sound, and ɗerfọr oht tu bi tạkn for ọn léter: so i, and u, ɗoh ɗẹ hạv ọn nạm and ọn figiur, as-uel being voëlɀ aɀ konsonants, iet bikauɀ ɗẹ hạv deivers sounds and deivers pouërs, boɗ in miters and in pronunsiasion of sílabժs, ɗẹ bị not (bei his opinion) tu bi tạkn for ɗe self and sạm elements ∾ /ov huiɕ opinion uaɀ aulso Claudius Cæsar, ɗemperour, huo hueilst hi uaɀ a private man, found uant ov léters, for ɗe /latin ureiting, and ɗen mạd a treatiɀ, huer-in hi δeuëd ɗe reSSons hou {O2} mịt it uas, tu-iuɀ ƥrị-uɗer léters fit for ɗe voises spọkn: huiɕ hi found tu bi for ɗe v, konsonant ɗe Aeolian /grịk gáma dubled ọn abọv ɗụɗer leik ɗe /romain kapital F, but turned doun-uard ɗus Ⅎ, huiɕ huen hi kạm tu bi /emperour, uas muɕ iuɀd boɗ in /rọm, and els-huer, but ɗe knọle𝒿 ɗerof kạm untu but a feu in respect ov ɗe multitiud, huer-fọr it tụk nọn éfekt after him. ∾ /ɗ’ius ɗerof uas ment tu hạv kept ɗe u, auluais voël (aɀ ei du in ɗis treatis, and urạt SerℲus and Ⅎixit for Servus and vixit, and ɗe /iota an-uɗer to put a díferens betuixt ɗe I, voël and konsonant, huiɕ iu sị Priscian feindeƥ reɀonabժ: and ɗe ɗird uas ψ, for huiɕ ɗe /latins found ɗer ij. léters bs, or ps, aɀ gud. ∾ /iu mẹ rịd ɗer-of in ɗe. xij. bụk ov Cornelius Tacitus, aulso C. Suetonius and A. C. Sabellicus du-ureit ɗer-of. ∾ /huiɕ aulso ɗe /grámarians and /orators, Papirian, Priscian and Quintilian hạv remembred in treating ov léters. ∾ /AEneas Silvius at ɗend ov ɗe sekond presept of hiɀ /rhetorik sẹƥ ɗe /grịk x, uaɀ found bei on Karment in ɗe teim ov Octavian, mạd leik a krós, signifeíng ɗe misteri ov ɗe krusifeiịng ov /khrist tu kum: huiɕ hi mẹneƥ tu bi {n. p.} borouëd ov ɗe /grịks, and put t’-an-uɗer ius ɗen ov r ɗẹ did, huiɕ uaɀ from ɗe sound ov our kh, tu gs, ks, or cs, huiɕ ɗẹ iuɀd befọr, and iu mẹ feind it reɀonabժ δuld bi so stil, for máter ov vois but for numbring iu mẹ iuɀ de x, aɀ most fit and kómodious ɗer-unto. ∾ /and furɗer in ɗe sạm presept hi sẹƥ aulso, ɗat ɀ, uaɀ but niuli found, and ɗat ɗe /latins uẹr ụnt tu ureit ɗe dubժ s, ɗerfọr: but ɗe soundɗerof is béter exprést uiɗ ds, huiɕ mi ɗinks bad bin mọr fit ɗan ɗe ss. ∾ ɗe /grịk, in old teims did iuɀ ɗẹr H, cut in .ij. ɗus Ͱ (aɀ ɗẹ du iet uiƥ ɗẹr grẹt léters (ɗ’ọn tu signifei ɗer aspiration /daseia, and ɗ’uɗer ɗẹr /psile, huiɕ ɗe /latins hạv tạkn huọl forr ɗẹr brẹƥ and so hạv ui-and uɗer nasions from ɗem. ∾ /histori-ureiters du deklạr ɗat léters uẹr not invented aul at ọns, nor bei ọn man, but in divers ạ𝒿es ∾ /ɗus in lẹving ov old or tạking of niu léters ui must bi riuled bei ɗe multitiud ov ɗe létred, huiɕ kan iuɀ ov ɗe reɀon & kómodite bei ɗ’uɗer. ∾ /and for kustum or ureiting aɀ ui find it ov our fọrfaɗers: for ɗat our predesésours uẹr never bound tu ɗe leik, no mọr ar ui at ɗis preɀent. ∾ /ei tạk Quintilian for mein autor {O3} (huo uiɗ mani uɗers) duɗ deklạr, in his sẹd first bụk treating ov orthographi, hou léters hạv from teim tu teim bin ɕan𝒿d ọn in ɗe plạs ov an-uɗer, and so bei rẹɀon, and for gud sound, ar kontinued: aɀ nạmlei for vortices and vorsus (uiɗ uɗers in ɗe sạm maner (hi sẹƥ Scipio ɗ’African did first ɕaun𝒿 ɗe o, intu e. ∾ /and ɗat ɗe skụlmạsters ov hiɀ dẹɀ urạt cervom and servom, uiɗ u and o, bikaus ɗe o, kuld not 𝒿iuín and bi konfounded in ọn sound uiƥ ɗe u, voël, huiɕ nou iɀ uritn uiɗ an u, dubled, iet bei neɗer ov ɗem uaɀ ɗe sound ov ɗe spịɕ deklạrd. ∾ /as mani lerned men els du, so duƥ aulso Æneas Silvius veri lar𝒿li deklạr ɗe ɕaung ov léters from ɗe radikaul or first ụrd, tu ɗe diuers uẹs in maner and teim huerin it mẹ bi spọkn, ákording to ɗe best and most perfet spịɕ iuɀd, aɀ iu mẹ sị in hiɀ treatiɀ, de liberorum educatione, in ɗe tịtժs, Quomodo consonantes geminari possunt, et literae mutari, and ɗe nekst after, Quomodo varientur literae etc. ∾

/ɗus muɕ hạv ei sẹd ov ɗe kustum of ureiting, bikaus sum lernd men in printing of Quintilians ụrks, hạv ɕaungd a ụrd, making {n. p.} ɗe sentens klịn agenst ɗ’autors meind: and ɗerfọr t’ópọɀ ɗem, and to kauɀ ɗe kóreksion ɗer-of ɗe best ei mẹ, in his sentens seited in ɗe. 9. Lef ov ɗiɀ bụk, ei hạv put NON quod consuetudo, and ɗat to giv suɕ kórupters ov ani manɀ sens a uarning ov ɗẹr èrour. ∾ Quintilian treating ɗe next ɕapter befọr ov kustum: Superest igitur consuetudo etc. ∾ /huer hi sẹƥ it uẹr a máter tu bi lauht at, t’áfekt ɗe old spịɕ mọr ɗen ɗat iɀ spọkn, and ɗerfor it iɀ nesésari tu kno huat ui δaul kaul kustum: ɗat if it δuld tạk nạm ov ɗat ɗe most ɗu, it δuld bi a most daun𝒿erous presept, not onli for ɗe maner ov spịɕ, but (ɗat huiɕ iɀ gréter (ov leif. ∾ /huens δaul ɗat blésing kum, ɗat triu and gụd ƥings δaul plẹɀ mani? ɗe veises huiɕ mẹ bi iuɀd ov ɗe multitiud, δaul bi no kustum, but in spẹking, ui kno ɗe unexpert vulgar du spẹk riudlei. ∾ /ɗer-fọr ei uil kaul kustum ov spịɕ, ɗe konsent ov ɗe lerned, aɀ ov living ɗe konsent ov gud men. ∾ /ɗen in his sẹd ɕapter ov orthographi. Verum orthographia quoque consuetudini servit, ideoque saepe mutata est. Nam illa vetustissima transeo tempora, quibus et pauciores literae, nec similes his nostris {n. p.} earum firne fuerunt, et vis quoque diversa sicut apud Graecos etc. and a litժ after De mutatione etiam literarum, de qua supra dixi, nihil repetere hic necesse est. Fortasse sicut scribebant, etiam ita loquebantur. ∾ /hier-bei it deƥ apịr ɗat ei hạv iuɀd ɗe fọrsẹd, non, tu bring ɗe sentens tu Quintilians meaning, from ɗat ɗe first kórekter, ei δuld sẹ kórupter, and uɗers after him, hạv put in nisi in deivers prints, under-standing ɗat hi had ment ov ɗe kustum ov ureiting, frạming ɗe sentens ɗat Quintilian δuld bi kontented tu bi subiekt tu ɗe kustom ov ureiting, and ɗerfọr tu-iuɀ it so-aɀ hi found it, hueraɀ iu mẹ sị beit ɗat is abụv-sed, and bei-aul ɗe rest of hiɀ fọrsed sentens, ɗat hiɀ mẹning uas ov ɗe kustum ov spịɕ & ákordingli, ei feind: Ego vero quod etc aɀ huo so list mẹ sị in /polɀ /ɕurɕ-iard at ɗe sein ov ɗe brạɀn /serpent. Iiij. kopies ov ɗ’ọn and as mani ov ɗ’uɗer sort. ∾ /but t’ez and satisfei suɕ aɀ ẹɗer uil not tạk ɗe pẹn, or for distans ov plạs kan not kómodiuɀlei, ei hạv nọted hierafter ɗe plạses, ɗe teims, and printers nạims. At Paris, Anno. 1516. ex officina Iodoci Badii ascencii. /aulso ɗer, 1527. {n. p.} Nicholai Savatier. /at Bazil. 1528. Ioanni Soter. /and ɗer. 1549. Roberti Winter, in huiɕ. iiij. kopiës it iɀ Ego vero quod etc. /and at Colein. 1541. Ioannis Gimnici. /at Paris. 1562. Stephani. /at Antuerp. 1548. Iohannis Loeï. /at Bazil. 1561. Nicholai Briling, iɀ printed Ego nisi quod etc. ∾ /huiɕ láter sort ɗe kórektor ov ɗe first kọpi, understụd ɗat Quintilian (bikạuɀ it is uritn in ɗe ɕapter ov orthographi) ment it tu bi consuetudo scriptionis, or uld fọrs us so t’understand him, and found ɗat nisi ụld frạm béter for ɗat purpoɀ: bue bei ɗat iɀ sẹd it duƥ plẹnli ápịr ɗat hi ment as ɗoh hi had uritn at lengƥ. Ego vero quod consuetudo sermonis obtinuerit: sic etc. /aɀ ɗe rest of ɗe sentens duƥ rịd his former ɕapter De consuetudine, and duƥ consider ɗe diskụrs ov hiɀ orthographi huerin iɀ urítn ɗe sentens abuv-sẹd, Verum orthographia quoque consuetudini servit, ideoque saepe mutata est: must be forsed tu konfés ɗat hi ment ov ɗe kustum ov spịɕ. ∾ /huer-fọr tu ɗat maintẹner ov kustum and his adherents, huer-bei our ureiting muht kontiniu-in {P1} disorder, ei ƥoht it gụd at ɗe beginning ov ɗiɀ bụk, tu gịv ɗem t’understand Quintilians meaning, and ɗerfọr urạt non quod consuetudo obtinuerit. /and du bilịv ɗat if Quintilian had ƥoht ɗat ani mā δuld ever hạv understụd him so, hi-ụld hạv áded ɗat ụrd sermonis, aɀ abụv, tu hạv put ɗe máter out ov aul dout, aɀ hi duƥ at ɗ’end ov his ɕaper De consuetudine, sẹing, Ergo consuetudinem sermonis, vocabo consensum eruditorum, sicut vivendi, consensum bonorum. ∾ /ov huọɀ meind uaɀ aulso AEneas Silvius, huo treating De liberorum educatione, at ɗ’end under ɗe titժ Quomodo varientur literae, duɗ aulso seit in maner Quintilians ụrds: and huo douteƥ ɗẹr autorituɀ, ɗẹr ueiɀdum, and greet learning: bịing so-uniuersálli knọn emongst sul lernd men. ∾ /and ịf iu resẹv ani friut ov ɗis mei lạbur, it iɀ but a króp gótn after ɗẹr invension, and espesiaulei of Quintilians, ov huoɀ ụrks not-uiɗ-standing (aɀ iu mẹ sị bei mei steil and riud maner ov ureiting) ei never studied, uɗer ɗen touɕing hiɀ seingɀ for ɗiɀ máter: huiɕ is kontẹnd in hiɀ first bụk huẹr is uritn, Nemo tamen reperitur, {n. p.} qui sit studio nihil consecutus. ∾ /iet haƥ not mei hed bin trubled uiɗ muɕ studi-in aul mei leif, neverɗelés ei-uiɗ aul mei hart du lụv and honor suɕ aɀ are lernd and vertiuz. ∾ /for iu mẹ sị bei ɗiɀ litժ treatiɀ ei hạv bin a traveler bu-iond ɗe seas, emong vulgar tungs, ov huiɕ, ɗat smaul knọle𝒿 ei hạv, haƥ bin ɗe kauɀ ov ɗis mein enterpreiɀ: and ɗer-uiɗ aulso ɗe sight ov a treasiɀ sett furth in print at Paris, Anno. 1545. bei an ụrɗi man uel lerned boɗ in /grịk and /latin nạmd Leuïs Meigret ov Lyon, touɕing ɗ’abius ov ɗe ureiting ov ɗe /frenδ tung, huoɀ reɀons and arguments ei du hier-befọr partlei-iuɀ, aɀ hị did Quintilians huom it ápịrd hi had uel studied. ∾ /and ei hạv sịn deiuers /frenδ bụks put furƥ in print in ɗat his maner ov orthographi, ov sum uel lịkt of, and resẹvd, and ov uɗerɀ left and repugned. ∾ /but huat gud and nọt abժ ƥing kan tạk a spịdi rụt, emongst a multitiud, eksept ɗe /prinses and /guvernurɀ (bei ɗe grạs huiɕ /god mẹ giv ɗem) du fạvor and sum-huat kọuntenans it. ∾ /iet as sẹƥ Quintilian in his first ɕapter ov his first bůk: praecipienda sunt optima: quae si quis gravabitur, non rationi defuerit, {P2} sed homini. ∾ /huiɕ signifeiëƥ, ɗe best ƥings ar tu bi taught: uiɗ huiɕ iv ani man bi-ófended, ɗe-uant δuld not bi-in ɗe reɀon, but in ɗe man. ∾ /and ɗ’argument ov ɗiɀ máter bịing ɗus far advansed, ei dout not but it uil-bi bei sum sekund Quintilians favored, perfeited, frạmd and iuɀd so, aɀ it mẹ bị for ɗe kọmon uelƥ: aɀ ɗe teim δaul kounsel ɗem. ∾

/and nou ei hạv ƥoht it gụd tu δio-iu, hou-iu mẹ uiɗ ɗe first ov eɕ pẹr ov our felọ konsonants (iuɀing priks in ɗem huen ɗẹ δuld hạv ɗ’inuard soūd, & lẹving ɗem unprikt huen ɗẹ δuld uant it) ureit ani ƥing in /ingliδ aɀ perfetlei aɀ uiƥ ɗ’-uder sẹvn uiƥ ɗem. ∾ /ɗ’experiëns huerof, ei lẹv tu suɕ aɀ d’understand mi, huen and aɀ it mẹ plẹɀ ɗem, and am kontented t’iuɀ ɗe, tugeɗer uiƥ ɗẹr féluɀ aɀ is sẹd, ɗoh ɗẹ du-inkrẹs our number bei sẹvn. ∾ /houb’ịt, sịịng ɗẹ hạv bin so- álouëd and iuɀd, ei sịk not tu gọ bak tu ɗe /hebriu maner agẹn in ɗat point. ∾ /but for ɗ’ius of priks, for ɗe kuantiti ov our voëlɀ, it duƥ sum-huat áliud tu ɗe /hebriu maner tu ɗe-ei, but noƥing in sens: for ɗ’iuɀ ɗẹr priks and litժ strịks under ɗẹr konsonants for ɗe divers sounds of ɗẹr voëls, and ui but for {n. p.} ɗe kuantitie of teim ov ours: and ɗat after ɗe maner ov ɗe /grịks aɀ is sẹd. ∾ /and uɗer-ueiɀ, iu mẹ-ureit veri brịfli after ɗ’/hebriu maner uiɗout ani priks, under our konsonants, for soūd ov ani voël, or ɗe δạp ov ani-ov ɗem, at ani teim, eksẹpt it bị huē ọn or mọr bi-uritn for a huọl silabժ, uiɗout ɗe help ov ani konsonant or breƥ, aɀ in ɗẹɀ prónounɀ ei, ui, iu, & ị, huẹr at lest ɗe láter must nịds bi-uritn tu giv understanding of sum person and number: and iet uiƥ sum ákuẹntans of ɗe máner and máter, a man mẹ bi-abժ tu rịd it perfetli, aɀ huo-so list mẹ (bei ɗe uẹ-ov pásteim) prụv. ∾ /ɗis keind ov ureiting uld bi dark, and sịm in maner a seifring: and iet hi ɗat δuld iuɀ it, ẹɗer for his oun remembrans, or exersịɀing ɗe SSam (uiƥ sum man ov experiens bịing mạd privi ɗer-unto) bei míseiv léters: ei bilịv ɗẹ δuld súfisientlei understand eɕ uɗer, for aul kómon máter, exsepting onli ɗe nạms of ƥings proper and ápélativ: huerin a man muht ér, if ɗẹ uẹr not uritn at lengƥ. ∾ /ei du sị no kómoditi in ɗ’ius ɗerof: but hạv δeuëd iu, huat a man mẹ du if hi so plẹɀ.

/ei hạv uritn hier-befọr ɗat ei-uld δeu-iu in ɗis niu máner ov ureiting, hou-everi-ọn ov {P3} our sounds & brẹɗs, is mạd uiƥ ɗ’instruments ov ɗe mouƥ, aɀ ei hạv dụn ɗẹr, ov ɗe feiv voëls, and ov ɀ, s, δ, and ժ. ∾ /ei noted ɗẹr, ɗat ɗe /frenδ du-iuɀ ɗe j, konsonant in a sound huiɕ ui-iuɀ not in our spịɕ: huerof ɗis δ, serveƥ for ɗe sister ɗer-of, uiɗ us, aɀ ɗe ch, duƥ uiƥ ɗem, having no-inuard sound, and ar boɗ frạmd uiƥ kịping ov ɗe tung from ɗe palet and bringing ɗe tịƥ tugeɗer, or ɗ’ọn or uɗer lip tu his kounter tịƥ, and ƥrusting ɗe breƥ ƥru ɗem uiƥ ɗ’in-uard sound, for ɗe /frenδ j, konsonant: huiɕ if ui had in ius, δuld mạk us ɗe aehtƥ pẹr. ∾ /for uant huer-of ɗe δ, duƥ remẹn tu-us, a breƥ uiɗout felu, huiɕ ɗ’-uɗer vij. pẹrs hạv. ∾ /but for uant ov ɗat sound, ui hạv. iiij. uɗers huiɕ ɗe /frenδ never iuɀ, tu uịt ov 𝒿, ɕ, and ɗ, ƥ, huiɕ ar veri hard for ani natural /frenδ tu pronouns: uɗer ɗan suɕ aɀ ar brouht up emongst vs sum-huat in iuƥ. ∾ /nou for ɗis pẹr  b, and  p, ɗẹ-ar mạd uiƥ klọs lips: ɗe fisrt uiƥ ɗ’in-uard sound, and ɗ’uɗer uiɗ-out ani sound, but opening ɗe lips uiƥ ƥrusting furƥ ov ɗe breƥ, and neɗer mạkeƥ ani voïs but bei ɗe help ov  v, and  f, huiɕ ar mạd bei púting ov ẹɗer lip tu his kounter tịƥ, ƥrusting {n. p.} furƥ ɗe brẹƥ for bọƥ, for ɗe first uiƥ ɗ’in-uard sound, and for ɗ’uɗer nọn: bọɗ pẹrɀ bịing mạd uiɗout stíring ov ɗe tung t’ani part ov ɗe tịƥ or pálet. ∾ /ɗe  g, and  k, ar mạd bei púting ov ɗ’iner part ov ɗe tung tu ɗ’úper grẹt tịƥ or gumɀ, ɗe first uiƥ ɗ’in-uard sound and ɗ’uɗer uiƥ ɗe brẹƥ ọnli. ∾ /ɗe  d, and  t, bei lẹing ov iur tung ful in ɗe palet ov iur mouƥ, and tuɕing hardest ov iur fọr-tịƥ, for ɗe first uiɗ ɗ’in-uard sound, and for ɗ’uɗer nọn: huiɕ tụ last pẹrɀ hạv a sertẹn stẹ ov ɗe brẹƥ leik aɀ had ɗe first pẹr, huiɕ kauɀeƥ it at ɗe seperating ov ɗe parts, tu-uit ov ɗe lips, and ov ɗe tung from ɗe tịƥ, tu bi ɗe harder ƥrust furƥ. ∾ /ɗe leik ov  𝒿, and  ɕ, bei púting ɗe tung tu ɗe palet and fọr-tịƥ softli, so aɀ ɗe brẹƥ bi stẹd: for ɗe first uiɗ an in-uard sound, and for ɗ’uɗer nọn. ∾ /but ɗe v, and f, and ɗ’uɗer tụ pẹrɀ hier-after hạv a kontinual uniform breƥ. ∾ /for  ɗ, and  ƥ, bei púting ov ɗe fọr part ov ɗe tung, tu ɗ’úper fọrtịƥ: so softli aɀ ɗe brẹƥ mẹ pas uiƥ ɗe sound for ɗ’ọn, and uiɗout for ɗ’uɗer, and for aul ɗe rest ɗer iɀ súfisientli sẹd, touɕing hou ɗe ar mạd bei ɗ’instruments of spịɕ. ∾ /nou-ei trust iu-ar satisfeid touɕing ɗe severaul léters for ɗe pertikuler voïses {n. p.} ov our spịɕ, uiƥ severaul léters for everi-ọn ov ɗem: and bei ɗer ius hier-bịfọr, wi ƥink iu feind ɗe maner ɗer-of mọr rẹɀonabժ ɗan our former. ∾ /huerfọr tu grọ tụards an end, ei-uil briefli δeu-iu huat furɗer belongs tu-a gụd and perfet ureiting.

/sum, ar ov ɗ’ópinion, ɗat it bekums not an /emprour, /prins, or /nobժ man tu-ureit uel and triuli: verelei, it is a persuaɀion ɗat ɗe natiur ov man iɀ mọr rẹdi t’óbẹ-untu, and tu lịv eidժlei, or in sum uɗer plẹzant exersịɀeɀ ov ɗe bodi, raɗer ɗen ov ɗe meind, but suɕ pạrents aɀ uil-bi so persuaded, never tasted ov ɗe suịt-nés ov learning. for sertenlei ɗer uaɀ never grẹt lerned nor exséling man but kụld ureit uel and triulei: ei ákount not uel onli-in a sloƥful kuriuɀ pẹnted ureiting, but ɗe mọr uniformlei and strehter ani man duƥ ureit, no man douteƥ but is iɀ ɗe béter: and ɗat is never or seldum obtẹnd exept it bi bigun in iuƥ (aɀ Quintilian sẹd at lar𝒿, in his sẹd fisrt bụk) and kontiniued ɗer-uiƥ for a nọbժ man uiɗ mani-uɗer vertiuɀ ịvn from the nurs. ∾ /and aulso uiƥ ɗe ɕois ov ɗe /nurs: and in ɗe rest ov his sẹd institusions, tu hạv lerned and vertiụɀ tiutors for ɗexersịɀ ov boɗ ɗe tung tu spẹk and hand tu {n. p.} ureit in aul vertiu- and gụd living. ∾ /and ɗat me bi kauld a-uel ureiting huen ɗe hand is so rẹdi aɀ in tạking no kạr, for ɗe fẹr, uniform and streht ureiting, ɗe meinf mẹ be huolei givn and ókupeiëd upon ɗe máter tu bi uritn, uiɗ sum kạr, ɗat it mẹ bi le𝒿ibժ aɀ uel for uɗers, as for ɗe ureiter, ∾ /and for triu-ureiting, befọr ɗer kan bi-ani perfet and súfisient riulɀ givn ɗer-of, ɗe parts ov spịɕ must bi konsidered, huiɕ never ani man kould begín tu frạm úpon ani siur ground, until ɗe foundasion uẹr found sertẹn and gud: huiɕ nou bịing hier-befọr touɕt ɗe rest mẹ bi dụn ɗe beter hier-after. ∾ /and δaulbe foụd a ƥank-ful urk, aɀ-uel for ɗe behụf ov our brọd spẹking /ingliδ, aɀ ɗ’/ualδ, /iriδ, and /skótiδ nasions, tu giv ɗem t’understand ɗe best spịɕ iuɀd ov ɗe lerned: aɀ aulso for aul uɗer (ov huat-so-ever stran𝒿 nasion) huiɕ mẹ deɀeir tu kno ɗe perfet sound and spịɕ ov ɗ’/ingliδ tung, ∾ /and for ɗ’advaunsment ov him huiɕ δaul tạk it in hand, ei uil briefli ureit huat ei feind (bei ɗat ei hạv hier-befọr uritn) touɕing our ius ov our sẹvn pẹrs ov léters in spịɕ. ∾ /and ɗerfọr ei-ụld gladli-it had bin ƥrulei observd, but ov kurteɀi bẹr uiɗ mi, for ɗat iɀ past, ei-uil indevor t’amend {Q1} ɗe foluing, ɗe best ei mẹ. ∾

/for ɗis ụrd ius, for huiɕ ui hạv urítn use, ui kuld hier-bifọr never feind díferens in ureiting, betuixt ɗe /noun and ɗe /verb, but urạt indíferentlei, the use is good, and I do use otherwise (huiɕ sentens in gud sụƥ ei-uaɀ not rẹdi tu-ureit, no mọr ei ƥink uẹr iu tu rịd) hueraɀ ei feind our spịɕ iuɀeƥ in aul teims and maners, (huiɕ ɗe /latin grámarian kauleƥ /tenses and /modes) ov ɗe ụrd uiƥ, ɀ, as ei-iuɀ, ɗou-iuɀest, hi-iuɀeƥ, ui, ị, and ɗẹ-iuɀ, iuɀd, iuɀing &. ∾ /& ov ɗe nạm uiɗ aul prepoſisions & artikժs singulerlei uiɗ s, but not pluráli, bicauɀ ɗe konsonant kúmeƥ betuixt. ij. Voëls, huer-fọr it is turned intu ɀ. ∾ /and furɗer ei feind ɗe ɀ iuɀd in iɀ, aɀ, hiɀ, ɗiɀ, and suɕ leik oftn, and ɗat ákording tu ɗe spịɕ, huiɕ iet huen ɗe foluíng ụrd begíneƥ uiɗ s, ɗ’order ov ɗe tung duƥ ɕaun𝒿 intu s, ɗus: iɀ uel, aɀ ani, hiɀ ọn, ɗiɀ uẹ, but ɗe foluing ụrd begíning uiɗ s, or δ, ɗus, is sed, as sụn, his sẹing, ɗis salt, and as δị, is δạmfast, his δert, ɗis δọr. ∾ /hier iɀ tu bi nọted ɗat ɗe first ov ɗ’uɗer breɗed tụ pẹr of konsonants, tu-uit v, and ɗ, mẹ oftn bi-in leik máner ɕanịd in spịɕ frō ɗẹr in-uard sound tu ɗer brẹɗd feluɀ, & kontrariueiɀ {n. p.} ɗe-ụrds ending uiɗ brẹɗd konsonants in sum plạs, mẹ (uiɗout ani-ófens tu ɗ’ẹr) tạk ɗe sound ov ɗẹr áfeịn beginnin ɗe next ụrd: or ɗe láter ov ɗe first ụrd bi ɕan𝒿ed from sound tu breƥ, huen her soūded áfein begíneƥ ɗe foluíng urd. ∾ /and ɗe leik mẹ hápn betuixt ɗe foụr uɗer pẹrɀ, tu uit b, and p: g, and k: 𝒿, and ɕ: d, and t, and gịv ɗe béter sound: huiɕ duƥ beautifi everi langa𝒿. ∾ /it mẹ bi aulso, ɗat ani ọn ov ɗe sounded ov ɗe sẹvn pẹrɀ, kómonlei in ọn ụrd, at ɗ’end ɗer-of,, mẹ lẹv ɗe sound and di obedient tu ɗe breƥ ov ani ọn ov ɗe sẹvn brẹɗd as for hạv tạkn: teim mẹ feind it gud to sẹhạf tạkn: for feind faut, to sẹ feint faut: and suɕ leik: iet until ui spẹk so, ei kno no man uil ureit so. ∾ /but ɗis iɀ tu bi noted ɗat ani ov ɗe breɗd ov ɗe sẹvn pẹrɀ, most kómonlei at ɗ’end ov ɗe former ụrd, huẹr ɗe foluïng begíneƥ uiɗ ọn voël or mọr, iɀ ɕan𝒿ed intu her áfein sounded, and ɗat bei ɗ’áfinite-it haƥ uiƥ ɗe voël, huiɕ ei hạv muɕ observed aɀ reɀon uaɀ. ∾ /aulso huen ọn voël endeƥ ọn ụrd, and an-uɗer begíneƥ ɗe foluïng, ei hạv iuɀd ɗe lein ov kon𝒿unksion tu giv knọle𝒿 ɗẹ mẹ not in bi 𝒿iuïned in diphthong. ∾ /and iet ɗẹ ar sounded round tu-geɗer, exept huen aɀ ɗe first is stẹid ɗe teim ov a kóma. ∾ {Q2} /and ɗ’apostrophe ei hạv iuɀd tu tạk a-uẹ a konsonant aɀ-uel aɀ a voël, iet but seldum.

/but ɗẹɀ díferenses ui hạv not foūd in our former maner ov ureiting not neuer kould du. ∾ /nor iet (aɀ is sẹd) kan ani man bi serten huiɕ t’iuɀ, and huiɕ tu lẹv, until it bi-uiɗ a mọr studi souht for, ɗen haƥ bin iet átempted, huiɕ ei trust sum man uil δortli tạk in hand, for ɗe uelƥ ov his kuntre. ∾ /and in ɗe meạn teim ei present iu ɗism aɀ a tọkn ov mei gud uil.

/ɗer iɀ aulso-a diskresion in ureiting betuixt a, mei, ɗei, fro, and no: and an, mein, ɗein, from and non. ∾ /a, iɀ fitlei-uritn huen ɗe-ụrd folụing begíneƥ uiɗ a konsonant, but uiɗ voël or diphthong ɗe n, stẹiƥ ɗe gạping ov ɗe tụ voëls huiɕ als δuld kum tugeɗer: ɗe leik ov ɗe rest: and nọn iɀ aulso-in stịd ov ne-ọn or not ọn. ∾ /so for tu-and til, huen ɗe presịding urd δaul end uiɗ d, or t, un, duƥ kum fitli betuixt ɗe t, ov tu or til, and ɗe former d, or t, tu seper ạt an overmuɕ sound or brẹɗing ov ɗem: so ɗat send untu-us, and hi sent untu-iu, iɀ béter sẹd and so uritn, ɗen send tu-us, or hi sent tu-iu, for so spọkn SSẹ muht giv ókaɀion tu ɗe bẹrer t’under-stand, send us, and hi sent iu. ∾ /in huiɕ and uɗer suɕ leik ɗe diskrésion ov {n. p.} ɗe-ureiter uil-bi iuɀd. ∾ /and for mei former δort ureiting, iu must konsider mei regard tu ɗe pronūsiasion, huiɕ ɗe multitiud ịvn ov ɗe best spọkn, du-iuɀ aɀ ɗiɀ ụrd kómaundement huiɕ iɀ ɗe /frenδ sound, and ureiting, ɗe /duɕ man sẹɀ silb for sílabժ, /claɀ, /hans, and /linke for our /nikles, /𝒿on, and /katerin, ɗẹ tạkịng so muɕ ov ɗe /latin as ɗẹ ƥoht gud, huo kan let ɗem tu ureit aɀ ɗẹ spẹk, or ou to ureit ours aɀ abụv, sịing ui spẹk so. ∾ /ɗe skótiδ spịɕ iɀ tuil-iu, for our huat uil-iu, huei mẹ ɗẹ not boldlei ureit it so? ∾ /nou for tẹɕing tu rịd, Quintilian sẹƥ it iɀ not gud tu tẹɕ ɗe nạms and order ov ɗe léters, befọr ɗe δaps, huiɕ bị sau mani du-in hiɀ dẹɀ, huerfọr ɗe tẹɕer δuld ɕan𝒿 and vari ɗẹr order diverselei, ɗat ɗe lẹrner muht print in hiɀ memori ɗẹr δạps, and so bei sịing ɗem tu bi-ạbժ tu nạm ɗem: ivn aɀ ɗe best uẹ tu knọ a man, iɀ bei ɗe siht ov hiɀ favour & proporsion, huer-bei his nạm iɀ ɗe béter retend. ∾ /furɗer bi kómendeƥ ɗ’ius ov sum ov hiɀ dẹɀ: huiɕ mạd ɗer léters ov /ivori, and gạv ɗem tu ɗer ɕilder tu plẹ: or huat-so-ever as muht bi invented for ɗe spịdier plạsing and preɀerving ov ɗe léters δAps and nạms, in ɗe memori ov ɗe riud, huoɀ kounsel ei ụld folo, if ei {Q3} did set furƥ an /a, /b, /c, for ɗe teɕing ov ɗe riud tu rịd, but uɗerueiɀ ɗen haƥ bin iet dun.

/nou ei uil end uiƥ Quintilians ụrds after hi had treated in his sed first bụk. 12. ɕapter first ov ɗe họp ɗe faɗer δuld hạv ov ɗe ɕild born, huat nirses, huat skụlmasters and tutors, and in huat spịɕ and exersịɀ hi δuld bi broht up in. ∾ /at ɗ’end ov his orthographi hi sẹƥ tu ɗis éfekt foluïng, ei kaul tu meind ɗat ɗer bi sum uil ƥink ɗeɀ máterɀ huer-of ei hạv uritn, tu bi but treifժs, and a hinderans tu him ɗat muht bi béter ókupied. ∾ /nor ei ƥink it mịt tu faul into ɗ’extrẹm trubժ, and fụliδ kavílasions, ɗerbei tu hurt and diminiδ mens uits: but no part ov /grámer hurteƥ, but ɗat huiɕ iɀ superflụɀ. ∾ /huat, uaɀ M. Tullius ɗ’orator ani ƥing ɗe les, for ɗat hi uaɀ most dili𝒿ent in ɗiɀ art, and ɗat hi kórekted hiɀ sunɀ faultɀ, aɀ it ápịrd in hiɀ /epistժs? Or did ɗe bụks huiɕ C. Caesar mạd ov /analo𝒿i brẹk his ụrɗines? Or uaɀ Messala nitidus ɗe lés, bikauɀ hi mạd serten huọl bụks, not ọnli ov evre-ụrd, but aulso ov ɗe léters. Non obstant hae disciplinae per illas euntibus, sed circa illas haerentibus. ∾ /huiɕ signifeiëƥ, ɗeɀ instruksions hinder not suɕ aɀdu pas bei ɗem, but suɕ aɀ stik, and ar (as it uẹr) teid in ɗem. {n. p.}

/exampժs hou serten uɗer nasions du sound ɗẹr léters, boɗ in /latin, and in ɗẹr muɗer tung, ɗerbei tu kno ɗe bẹter hou tu pronouns ɗẹr spịɕes, and so tu rịd ɗem as ɗẹ du. /kap. viij.

For ɗe konfirmasion ov ɗar huiɕ is sẹd, for ɗe sounds aɀ-uel of voëls aɀ of konsonants: aulɗoh ei hạv in divers plases hier-befọr δeuëd iu, hou serten uɗer nasions du sound part ov ɗẹr léters: ei ƥoht it gud hier, not ọnli to rekapitulat and δortli rehers, part ov ɗe befọr mensioned, but aulso tu giv iu t’understand hou ɗẹ du sound suɕ ɗẹr léters, aɀ ɗ’ignorāt ɗer-of δuld áprọɕ noƥing nẹr tu ɗẹr pronunsiasion bei rịding ɗẹr ureiting or prints. ∾ /huerfọr, huo so-iɀ deɀeirous tu rịd ɗ’/italian and ɗe /latin as ɗẹ du, hi must sound ɗe voëlɀ aɀ ei hạv súfisientli sẹd treating ov ɗem, and aɀ ei hạv iuɀd ɗem in aul ɗis niu maner, onli exepting ɗat ɗẹ mạk ɗis figiur u, konsonant aɀ-uel aɀ ɗIs v. ∾ /ɗer c, ɗẹ iuɀ after qul voëlɀ as ui ɗe k, (as ɗẹr pro𝒿enitors ɗe /latins did) {n. p.} and iuɀ not k, at aul: but ɗẹ-abiuɀ ɗe c, bifọr e, and i, in ɗe sound ov our ch, or ɕ, aɀ ecce and accioche, ɗẹ sound ekɕe, akɕioke, francesco, franɕesko, fece, facendo, amici, feɕe, faɕendo, amiɕi: and for ɗe sound ov ɗe k, ɗẹ iuɀ ch. ∾ /ɗẹr g, ɗẹ kịp aɀ ei hạv dun after voëlɀ, and befọr a, o, and u: but befọr e, and I, ɗẹ hạv abiuɀd it uiɗ us, for huiɕ ei hạv iuɀd ị, and tu kịp ɗat sound befọr a, o, and u, ɗẹ uɀurp gi, as haƥ bin sẹd, and ɗerfọr ɗẹ never mạk ɗẹr I, konsonant, for ɗẹ sẹ not agiuto, but aiuto, aɀ mẹ bi ɗus ai-uto. ∾ /ɗe t, ɗẹ never sound in s, aɀ in protettion, satisfattion, ɗẹ sound ɗe t, hard, and ɗerfọr dubժ-it in ɗọɀ ụrds and mani-uɗers: but in /giuriſditioni, /militia, /sententia, /intentione, and mani-uɗers ɗẹ du not dubժ it, iet ɗẹ sound it as it iɀ, and nover turn it intu ɗe sound ov s, but iv iu mark it uel, ɗẹ breƥ ov ɗE t, pásing ƥruh ɗe tịƥ, and turning tu ɗe-i, duƥ mạk it sịm as it uẹr nẹr ɗe sound ov ɗe, s, but iɀ not ɗerfọr so in éfekt. ∾ /for ɗẹr gli, ɗẹ du not sound g, so hard aɀ ui uld, but so softli aɀ it iɀ oftn uritn and printed uiɗout ɗe g. ∾ /ɗẹr ɀɀ, ɗẹ sound most kómonli ɗe first ɀ, in t, as in /forteɀɀa, /grandeɀɀa, /deſtreɀɀa, but at sum teimms ɗẹ sound ɗem {n. p.} aɀ ɗẹ du cc, as for ɗiz nạm ɗẹ-ureit indíferentli Eccellino, or Eɀɀellino. ∾ /ɗẹ hạv aulso ɗe sound ov our ſh or δ, huiɕ ɗẹ-ureit ſc, befọr, e, or i: ɗẹ-iuɀ tu-ureit ɗe th, but not for our th, or ƥ: for ɗẹ hạV not ɗe soūd ɗerof in aul ɗẹr spịɕ, nor ov ɗ, & sound it in /matthio, aɀ mẹ bi mathio, as of th, iɀ sẹd in /thomas and /thames. ∾ /and for lak ov a knole𝒿 for ɗe kuantitiɀ ov ɗẹr voëlɀ ɗẹ-ar konstrẹnd tu dubժ ɗẹr kọnsonants oftn and muɕ: and for ɗe longer teim ov ɗẹr voëls, ɗẹ hạv no mark: huerfọr huo so-iɀ deɀeiruɀ tu rịd ɗer ureiting uel, and imitạt ɗẹr pronunsiasion had nịd tu hạv sum instruksion bei ɗe leivli voïl. ∾ /and huen ɗẹ du rẹɀ ɗẹr tiun ov ɗẹr urds (huiɕ iɀ oftn) ɗẹ nọt it uiɗ ɗe /latin grạv tiun, ɗus, andò, parlò, e mostrò la nouità, al podestà de la città. ∾ /and in rịding ɗe /latin, aul ɗat ɗẹ feind uritn, ɗẹ du pronouns, ịvn as ɗẹ du ɗẹr muɗer tung, in ɗe veri sounds befọr-sẹd.

/for ɗe hih duɕ ɗẹ sound aul ɗẹr voëlɀ in ɗe veri sạm sort: and never mạk ɗe i, konsonant, nor abiuɀ ɗe g, befọr ɗe e, and i, aɀ ɗ’/italian duƥ, but kịp it aulueɀ befọr ɗem, aɀ befọr a, o, and u: & ɗe /fleming tu bi siur tu kontiniu ɗat sound, duɗ iuɀ it befọr e, and I, uiɗ, h. ∾ {R1} /nor haƥ ɗe /duɕ (over nor neɗer) ɗat sound huiɕ iɀ ɗe leik ov our I, konsonant, and ɗ’italian gi, bifor-sẹd, for huiɕ ei iuɀ 𝒿, but ɗe breƥ ɗer-of ɗe hih /duɕ hạv, & ureit it uiɗ tsch. ∾ /and boɗ ɗe figiurs for ɗe feivƥ voël, ɗẹ iuɀ uiɗout ani serten diferens huiɕδuld bi voël or huiɕ konsonant: and ɗen hạv ɗẹ ɗe diphthongs befọr nạmd, /folio 31. pa.2 huiɕ ar tu bi nọted ov ɗat /ingliδ man huiɕ δaul deɀeir tu lẹrn ɗẹr tung. ∾ /and du-iuɀ tu dubժ ɗẹr voëlɀ for ɗẹr longer teim. ∾ /ɗẹ hạv aulso our sound ov ſh, or δ, for huiɕ ɗẹ iuɀ ſch, as ſcham, ſchale, fleiſch and fiſch, ɗẹ soūd as ui mẹ δạm, δel, fleδ, fiδ, and ſce, ſci, ɗẹ sound aɀ duƥ aulso ɗ’/italian: and aɀ ui du δe, δi. ∾ /ɗẹ never put ɗe c, intu ɗe sound of s, but iuɀ k, tu bi-out of dout. ∾ /ɗẹ iuɀ ɗe Q, veri seldum, but ɗe k, muɕ in plạs ɗer-of, and ɗe-a, ɗẹ du-oftn sound brọder ɗen ui dụ, but muɕ aulso-as ui du. ∾ /and for ɗe rest ɗẹ pronouns aul ɗẹ-ureit, and kịp ɗẹr lèters in ɗe self sound, huer-in ɗẹ rịd aulso ɗẹr /latin. ∾

/nou ƥirdli for ɗe /spaniard hi abiuɀeth ɗe I, and u, in konsonants as ui-and ɗe /frenδ du, and ɗe u, oftn, in ɗe /frenδ and /skótiδ {n. p.} sound: and ɗe ch, in /muchacho aɀ ui du iu ɕalk and ɕịɀ: but for aul ɗẹr uɗer voëɀ and léters, ɗẹ iuɀ ɗem in ɗe sạm sounds ɗat du ɗ’/italian and /duɕ, but ɗat ɗẹ iuɀ ɗe y, aɀ ui hạv dụn (huiɕ neɗer /italian nor /duɕ nịd) tu bi ɗerbei ẹɀd ov ɗe dout ov ɗe i, konsonant huiɕ ɗẹ sound leik ɗe /frenδ. ∾ /ɗe c, ɗẹ iuɀ in s, uiɗout ani nọt ov diferens befọr e, and i. but befọr a, o, and u, ɗẹ hạv deueiɀd a-litժ, s, under ɗus, ç: ɗẹ iuɀ never ɗe k, but ɗe Q, uiƥ ɗ’/italian: ɗẹ-iuɀ ɗe ll, in ɗe sound ov ժ, uiɗ ɗe ualδ. ∾ /ɗe u, in quae and, qui, ɗẹ du seldum sound, as for que quieres, ɗẹ sound as ui mẹ ke kierez. ∾ /and for aul ɗe rest ɗẹ kịp ɗe aunsient /latin sound, and so rịd ɗẹr /latin aɀ du ɗ’/italian and /𝒿erman: and for him ɗat haƥ ɗe /latin tung uiɗ a-litժ instruksion iɀ aɀ eɀi tu rịd and under-stand aɀ iɀ ɗ’italian. ∾

/and nou last ov aul, ɗe /frenδ, uiɗ ɗ’abius ov ɗe u, in ɗe skótiδ leik sound ov ɗe iu diphthong, huiɕ, nor /italian, nor /duɕ did ever giv iu u: and iuɀing ɗe g, and j, konsonant in ɗe sound huer-of, our δ, iɀ ɗe breɗed konsonant: and turning ɗe s, intu ɀ, huen ui, uiɗ aul ɗe rest, du sound ɗe s, (exept ɗe /spaniard, aɀ {R2} ui hạv aulso iuɀd betuixt tụ voelɀ) and kịping an uɗer teim in ɗér voëlɀ ɗen ui du, and iuɀing ɗẹr e, in deivers sounds, and ɗe o, sumhuat aulso: bei not sounding ɗe u, in qui, and quæ, but aɀ uị mẹ kị, and kẹ, uiɗ lẹving mani ov ɗẹr leters vnsounded, duƥ kauɀ ɗẹr spịɕ veri hard tu bi lernd bei art, & not ẹɀi bei ɗe leivli voïs, aɀ it iɀ notoriuɀli knọn. ∾ /so aɀ if ei δuld ureit /frenδ, in ɗe léters and order buiɕ ei du nou-iuɀ, ei-am serten ɗat iu δuld muɕ sụner kum tu ɗẹr pronunsiasion, ɗer-bei, ɗen bei ureiting aɀ ɗẹ du. ∾ /and tu experiment ɗe máter, and tu mạk suɕ aɀ understand /frenδ, 𝒿u𝒿es ɗer-of, ei uil ureit ɗe /lords prẹr aɀ ɗẹ du, huiɕ δuld be preɀēted tu suɕ an ọn, aɀ kan rịd ɗis maner, and iet understandeƥ not ɗe /frenδ, and prụv hou hi kan rịd and pronouns it: and ɗen present it him in ɗis maner ov ureiting, aɀ hier-after: and kompạr his pronunsiasion tu ɗe former, and iu δuld prụv ɗat éfekt, huiɕ kan not bi broht tu pás bei our former maner. ∾ /and ɗer-fọR hier foloueth ɗe /lords prẹr fisrt in /frenδ and ɗẹr maner ov ureiting. Notre père qui es és cieux, Ton nom soit sanctifié. Ton Regne advienne. Ta volonté soit faite en la terre comme au {n. p.} ciel. Donne-nous aujourd’hui notre pain quotidien: et nous pardonne nos offenses, comme nous pardonnons à ceux qui nou ont offensés. Et ne nous indui point en tentation: mais nous delivre du mal. Car à toi est le regne, la puissance, et la gloire és siecles, des siecles. Amen. ∾ /nou in ɗIs niu mane aɀ foluëƥ. ∾ /nọtrah pẹrah hi-eɀ ẹɀ sieuɀ, tun /num soit santifié. ∾ /tun /rénah avié-nah. ∾ /ta voluntè soit fètah, an la tárah kúmah ọ siel. Dúne-nụɀ ọɀ𝒿ụrdui nọtrah pẹn kotidian. E nụ pardúnah noɀ ófabses kúmah nụ pardúnụnɀ a seuɀ ki nụɀ unt ófanseɀ. /e ne nụɀ indui point an tantasion : mẹɀ nụ delivrah diu maժ. ∾ /kar a toe ẹt le renah, la piuìsánse e la gloerah ẹɀ siekles deɀ siekles /aman. ∾ /nou kontrariueiɀ uil ei ureit hier-under in ɗẹɀ niu lèters (and kịping ɗẹr sound aɀ befọr) hou ɗe /frenɕ du pronouns ɗẹr /latin : and ɗat aulso in ɗe /lords prẹr, huiɕ iɀ aɀ ɗus. ∾ /pạter noster ki eɀ in selịɀ, santifiscitur nomen tiuium, atveniat reínium tiuium fiat voluntạɀ tiua sikiut in selo e in tára panem nostrium kotidianium da nobịɀ odịe & dimịte nobị debịta nostra, sikiut et noɀ dimịtimiuɀ debitoribiuɀ {R3} nostriɀ. ∾ /et ne noɀ indiukạɀ in tentasioinem : /set libera noɀ a malo. ∾ /and ei remember ov a meri 𝒿est ei hạv herd ov a buẹ huiɕ did help a /frenδ prịst at más, huo sẹing dominiu vọbikium, ɗe buẹ hẹring it sound stran𝒿li-in hiɀ ẹr, aunsuered, eƥ kum tirlerí tịium, and so uent lauhing his uẹ. ∾ /and so peradventiur iu-uil at ɗerịding, aɀ iu mẹ bilịv me-ei did at ɗe ureiting hier-of. ∾ /ei kuld ureit aulso hou ɗe frenδand uɗer forens du spek /ingliδ, but ɗẹr maner is so plentiful in mani-of our ẹrɀ, aɀ ei ƥink it superfluiɀ. ∾ /ɗe reɀon huei ɗẹ kan not sound our spịɕ, iɀ (aɀ iu mẹ persẹv bei ɗat is sẹd) bikauɀ ui hạv and iuɀ sertẹn sounds and brẹɗɀ huiɕ ɗẹ hạv not, and du-aulso iuɀ tu sound sum ov ɗọɀ léters huiɕ ɗẹ-iuɀ uiɗ us, uɗerueiɀ ɗen ɗẹ dụ: and ɗẹ for reven𝒿 sum ov ourɀ uɗerueiɀ ɗen ui dụ. huiɕ iɀ ɗe kauɀ aulso ɗat ɗẹr spịɕes ar hard for us tu rịd, but ɗe soūd ọns knọn, ui kan ẹɀili pronouns ɗers bei ɗe reɀon abuvsed. ∾ /and ɗus tu-end if iu ƥink litժ profit tu bi in ɗis huer-in ei hạv kaused iu tu pás iur teim, ei uil iet disɕar𝒿 mei self ɗat ei-am ásiured it kan du-iu no harm, and so ɗe aulmihti /god, giver ov aul gud ƥins, blịs uɀ aul, and send us his grạs in ɗis transitori leif, {n. p.} and in ɗe uorld tu kum, leif everlasting. ∾

/so bị-ịt. ∾

FINIS.

Sat cito si sat bene.

/an aduertuɀment touɕing ɗ’order ov ɗe foluinf tạbժ

/bikauz ɗe voëls and konsonants ar deveided intu suɕ parts aɀ befọr, ɗis tạbժ duƥ kịp ɗem in ɗe leik order: tu-uịt first a, e, i, o, u, and ɗen ɗe foụr pẹrɀ huiɕ ar mạd uiɗ a stóping breƥ: tu uịt b, p: d, t: g, k: and 𝒿, ɕ. ∾ /ɗen ɗ’uɗer ƥrị ƥrulei brẹɗd pẹrs, tu uịt ɗ, ƥ: v, f: and ɀ, s. ∾ /ɗen ɗe. 5. semivokạls l, m, n, r, and ժ, and ɗe tụ brẹɗs δ, and h: aulso, for ɗat in ɗ’order befọr iuɀd, ɗeɀ niu léters ar not komprehended. ∾ /huer-fọR ɗis tạbժ is plạsed and sey in suɕ order as foluëƥ. {R4}

/a tạbժ direkting tu ɗ’spesiaul máterɀ ov ɗis bụk. ∾ /ɗe first pa𝒿 marked 1, and ɗe sekund, 2.

/a

 /e.

 /i

 /o

 /u

 /b

 /p

 /d

 /t

 /g

 /k

 /𝒿

 /ɕ

 /ɗ

 /ƥ

 /v

 /f

 /ɀ

 /s

 /l

 /m

 /n

/r

 /ժ

 /δ

 /h

FINIS.

Seene and allowed according to the order appointed.

Imprinted at London by William Seres, dwelling at the west end of Paul’s, at the signe of the Hedgehog.

{n. p.}

Iacobus Coogenes Bredanus, Lectori

Anglia cum lachrimis ducens suspiria corde,

Lucida replebat talibus astra sonis:

Heu me, cur Graecis, Haebraeis atque Latinis,

Verba typis aptis explicuisse datur?

Et generosa tamen nunquam gens Anglica rectis

Quae loquitur potuit pingere verba notis?

Talia conquestam divam Chesterus heraldus

Audiit: hinc patriae suppetiasque parat.

Atque dolens tristem casum conatibus instat

Dedecoris tantas obliterare notas.

Ac literas multas, quas consinxere parentes

Sustulit, his etenim debitus usus abest.

Inde novos secum, quo possit commodus esse

Omnibus, effinxit composuitque typos.

Non hic sufficiunt quos olim prisca vetustas

Excogitare typos, maius at urget opus.

Sunt literae hic quarum virtutes atque valores

In aliis linguis non reperire queas.

Quare certatim grates quibus Anglica cordi,

Authori & scriptis reddite quisque suis.

{¶ 1}

The compositor to the reader

You may be encouraged by me,

Until you have read all this book,

Loath I was the workman to be,

Which yet at length in hand I took,

And truly as I found and know,

In passing through the doubtful way,

The drift and reason took me so,

That when I should the old assay,

Mine often missing did bewray,

That my senses were wholly bent,

To use and keep the new intent.

{n. p.}

To the doubtful of the English orthography, John Hart Chester herald wisheth all health and prosperity

Orthography is a Greek word signifying true writing, which is when it is framed with reason to make us certain with what letters every member of our speech ought to be written. By which definition we ought to use an order in writing, which nothing cared for unto this day, our predecessors and we have been (as it were) drowned in a manner of negligence, to be contented with such manner of writing as they and we now have found from age to age. Without any regard unto to several parts of the voice, which the writing ought to represent. And so have written at {n. p.} a venture, without th’order and reason, which is in every perfect writing: wherein there ought to be a mean, as in everything else, according to these verses:

Est modus in rebus, sunt certi denique fines,

 Quos ultra citraque nequit consistere rectum.

And though in this treatise the perfection of the subject be not attained unto, yet is there an entrance given, whereby it may be the easier finished by some others hereafter, whose better learning and experience may cause them to work more substantially than in herein done, according to the saying of Quintilian in the last chapter of his twelfth book, De institutione oratoria, where he encourageth men to that study which mought make them perfect in life and doctrine: being a far greater matter than perfectly to write: which is therefore much the easier to be taken in hand, attained unto, used, where he sayeth: Natura enim nos ad mentem optimam genuit, adeoque discere meliora volentibus promptum est {n. p.} ut vere intuenti mirum sit illud magis, malos esse tam multos. Which signifieth, “truly Nature hath begotten us to the best mind, and it is so ready for the willing to learn the best things that he that would consider it well should marvail the more, there should be so many evil men”. And I, touching writers, do marvail our predecessors have continued in the disorder and confusion which is in our English writing. And a little after he sayeth, Omnia breviora reddet ordo et ratio et modus, which signifieth order and reason and mean do make all things more brief and easy. And further, Sed culpa est in praeceptoribus prima, and so he continueth to this sense: but the first fault is in the schoolmasters, which keep child willingly, partly by covetousness to get thereby their longer small hires, partly by ambition that the thing they promise should be thought the harder to be learned, partly also by ignorance or negligence in teaching; and secondly in us, bicause we think {n. p.} it better to continue in that we know, that to learn the thing we know not. Wherefore though none of them hath considered th’abuse of our writing, and endeavoured the best they could to seek the correction thereof, yet me think they should not be offended with him that shall do his good will therein. Which I have done as hereafter with the due consideration what letters are, and thereafter framed their use to be knowen certainly for the members of our speech. Wherein is kept the mean according to the abovesaid two verses neither to be troubled with excess, nor to be in penury for want. To the understanding whereof the readiest way is to begin, and so to follow in order: and not preposterously to begin at the latter end where some may take occasion to be offended (at the sight of the strange letters) if they should not consider the reasons alleged, with the instructions hereafter, to prepare them toward the reading thereof. For whoso is so {n. p.} greedy to ride, that when he seeth a saddled horse, he will needs leap on, he may sooner repent him than have his desire. Therefore, before you build, be sure of a good foundation, and then you may work certainly and not by chance. And accordingly here followeth a certain order of true writing of the speech, founded upon reason mother of all sciences: wherewith you may happily be profited, and so health and the grace of God be with you. So be it.

Faults escaped in part of the copies of this first impression

Folio 3, page 2, line 3: “Who so” read “So, who so”.

Folio 7, page 2, line 4: “tung” read “writing”.

Folio 12, page 2, line 23: “propable” read “probable”.

Folio 29, page 1, lines 22, 23: “in this chapter” read “hereafter”.

Folio 34, page 1, line 14: “siue” read “sine”.

From the 34 to the 64 leaves, they are wrong numbred. Which are to be corrected ere the table can serve.

Folio 42, page 1, line 22, for folio 26 make 40.

Folio 43, page 2, line 1, for folio 34, 35 make 38, 39.

Folio 61, page 2, line 15: “n” read “m or n”.

Folio 63, page 2, line 22: “gh” read “gli”.

Folio 66, page 1, line 6: “Gar” read “Car”.

{n. p.}