SPELLING. 432 SPELMAN. a, u, ai, ei, ie, eo, ue, ay, oe, -ave, as in get, head, many, bury, said, heifer, friend, leopard, guess, says, fcrtid, Abergavenny (abergen'i). O (no) = o, o-e,' oa, ov, ou, owe, oe, oo, ew, ewe, ough, oh, eau, eo, au, os, aut, ock, as in holy, vote, road, boul, soul, rott'ed, woe, brooch (broch), sew, sewed, though, oh, heau, yeoman, hauteur, apropos, hau/boy, CocA:buru (kO'bnl. C (come) =: c, k, q, ck, ch, ec, cq, qu, que, Ik, gli, sc, s, ke, Ike, quh, cch, as in call, kill, quell, hack, ache, account, acquaint, liquor, havque, walk, hough, viscount, except, Bur/ce, FoZfcestone, Vrquhart, Bacc7ianal. T (tip) — t. tt, ed, th, tw, bt, et, pt, cht, phth, te, tte, as in ten, be//er, stopper^, /ftyme, two, Aeht. indict recei;)*, yacht, phthisis, caste, gazette. In brief, the 44 (with the diphthongs) pnglish sounds are repre- sented by upward of 500 symbols and combina- tions. From this it results that an English word can. theoretically, be written in a great variety of forms. The confusion of English spelling, however, while great, is not so complete as might be ex- pected from its above-stated theoretical defects; it exhibits a certain amount of system and it is possible also to demonstrate in it a very con- siderable phonetic element. Apart from the in- adequacy of the alphabet, its chief practical defects are the ambiguities in the use of c and A; (cat, kill), c and s (cinder, seat), f and ph {fool, p^iilosopher) , t and d or ed (dropped, kept), ch and k {cholera, fceep), and the em- ployment of silent letters, that is, letters which if omitted would leave the symbol (see above) a simpler and, generally a more common (though n<it necessarily more ]dionetioally correct) one for the same sound (as in feather, jeopardy, par- liament, pedagogue, guard, add, feijrn, gftost, though, thoroup/i, scythe, etc.). SPELLING REFORM. The modiiication of customary spelling in such a way as to remove, or at least lessen, the divergence of orthography from pronunciation. (For the origin, character, and practical results of this divergence, particu- lar!}' in English, see Spelling.) Complete re- form of this sort involves: (1) The elimination of superfluous letters (e.g. in English, of two of the equivalent letters c (hard), k, and q) : (2) the enlargement of the alphabet by the addition of enough symbols (letters or digraphs) to rep- resent all the significant speech-sounds of the language (in English there are 40 elementary sounds and but 26 letters) ; (3) the use of each letter or symbol to represent but one sound ; and ( 4 ) , in English the use of the letters of the al- phabet with their Roman values. Among such (proposed) remodelings of the English alphabet the most practical is that adopted by the Ameri- can Philological Association and given above in the article on Spelling. If the above-stated con- ditions were fulfilled, orthography and pronuncia- tion would be in harmony — that is, spelling would be essentially phonetic. While, however, such completeness is the aim of the modern spelling reformer, it has hitherto remained — and is likely long to remain — merely an ideal. The customary spelling is so firmly connected with the habits, the practical interests, and the sesthetic (liter- ary) sentiments of its users that such thorough- going reform of it is impracticable, changes in the alphabet especially being very hard to intro- duce. The practical efforts of the reformers are accordingly now directed almost exclusively toward the sim|difieation of spelling by the re- moval of irregularities which can be eliminated without radically changing the forms of words, and by the omission of silent letters which are phonetically useless (that is, do not determine the value of another letter, as does the silent e of English hate). Changes of this sort have occurred sporadicall}' at every period in every European language: the spelling reformer at- tempts merely to make this familiar process more general and systematic. Rules for such simplifi- cation were adopted in 1883 by the American Philological Association and the British Philo- logical Society, and in 1886 a list of amended spellings, based upon them, was adopted by the Pliilological Association and published in its Traustictions. It has since been republished in (and approved by) the leading American diction- aries. While simplification of this .sort would not, alone, produce phonetic accuracy, it would greatly enhance the phonetic character, luiiform- ity, and simplicity of English spelling. Up to the present time, however^ spelling reform, even in this restricted sense, though persistently urged b}' special associations and by persons of high scientific and literary authority, has made but little headway. Certain of the recommendations of the philological societies have been put into practice by a few individuals and journals, and by some scientific societies, but no general ten- dency to adopt them has been evident. Perhnjis the most important step in this direction was the adoption by the American Xational Education Association in 1S9S of the twelve simplified spell- ings: Program, tho, altho, thoro. thorofare, thru, thruout, catalog, prolog, decalog, dema- gog, pedagog. In France, where the peculiarities of oi-thog- raphy give spelling reform a practical imiiortance second only to that which it has in English- speaking countries, nuich interest in this subject has long existed, but little has been accomplished, the French being in matters of orthography al- most as conservative as the English. The reform has also been active in Germany, and something has been done there, particularly in the omission of silent letters {trit for tlint, etc.). Spanish and Italian spelling are so simple and so largely phonetic that the ])ractical reasons for reform have relatively little application to them. SPEL'MAN, Sir Henry (c.1.564-1641) . An English antiquary and philologist. He was born at Congham, Norfolk, and was educated at Cambridge and in law at Lincoln's Inn. He became High Sheriff of Xorfolk. and was employed on various public missions by King James. In 1612 he removed to London, where he began to devote himself to the investi- gation of ancient law and custom with a view to establishing their relation to the English Con- stitution. In prosecuting this work he encoun- tered so many strange and obsolete words that he turned aside to compile a glossary of law terms the first part of which, to the end of the letter L, he published in 1626. at his own expense. The second volume appeared in 1664 edited by Sir William Dugdale. He also compiled a collection of decrees of English Church councils from 1066 to 1531. He is best known in modern times by this and his curious History n>rd Fate of Sacrilege (1693: new ed., London, 1846. 1853).
