WISCONSIN JOURNAL OF EDUCATION.

VOL. IX.

NOVEMBER, 1879.

NO. XI.

THE FUNCTION AND VALUE OF ORTHOEPY IN EDUCA

TION.

[Paper read before the Annual Meeting of the Institute Conductors, at Li Crosse, July 7, 1879, by

Prof. ALBERT SALISBURY.]

I do not love the word "phonics." It is curt, undignified, and too easily subject to ridicule. The simple spelling, f-o-n-i-k-s, though in itself fitting and consistent, is still able to excite, oftentimes, a sudden and derisive prejudice quite fatal to candid consideration. The terms phonetics and phonology, strictly synonymous with phonics so far as our dictionaries testify, are either of them in every way preferable as words, though phonics appears to me to have acquired a distinct meaning in its current use, a meaning not yet recognized in the dictionaries. Of this, more anon.

Is it phonetics or orthoepy of which I should speak? For these termis are not synonymous. Is either inclusive of the other? If not, which is the one legitimately before us? The Revised Statutes of Wisconsin make orthoepy a subject of instruction in the public schools, and of examination for teachers. They say nothing of phonics or phonetics. Let us briefly examine the signification of the terms.

Orthoepy is the art of pronunciation. The rules and practices of any art may be purely empirical, imitative, and unreflecting; or they may be of scientific origin, indebted to science for their discovery or statement. So here, our pronunciation, i. e., our orthoepy, may be wholly empirical, a matter of combined imitation and accident; or it may be largely affected by a conscious and systematic application of the general principles and analogies of spoken language. Orthoepy

1- Vol. IX.- No. 11

a

asks what is correct in the utterance of words, it need not concern itself, necessarily, with the questions why or whence. Phonetics, on the other hand, is a science, the science of the sounds of human speech, — dealing not with pronunciation but with enunciation, an important element of pronunciation. It is not a branch of grammar, like orthoepy, but of acoustics, - and so, clearly a physical science. It is a young science, not dreamed of till orthoepy was old, and yet very far from being complete and settled in all its points. When we teach the organic distinctions between the six sounds of a, or between the sounds of f and p, we are working in phonetics. When we determine the location of accent in a polysyllable, or obey the law that

an accented vowel followed by rr, or r. followed by a vowel has its regular short sound,” we are working in orthoepy. When we train a child to the correct apprehension and facile execution of the troublesome sounds of a language, we are working in phonetics for the sake of orthoepy. Phonetics is analytic, orthoepy is synthetic. Phonetics must precede an intelligent and scientific orthoepy, though it may be wholly unknown to an unintelligent and hap-hazard pronunciation. Phonetics is the scientific antecedent of orthoepy, though its value is by no means limited to its serviceableness in orthoepic art.

Hear what the first of American philologists has to say of phonetic science: “The study of phonetics has long been coming forward into more and more prominence as an essential part of the study of language; a thorough understanding of the mode of production of alphabetic sounds, and of their relations to one another as determined by their physical character, has become an indispensable qualification of a linguistic scholar. And he who cannot take to pieces his native utterance, and give a tolerably accurate account of every item in it, lacks the true foundation on which everything else should repose.

I would that these sound words of Prof. Whitney might be brought. before the eyes of every student of language.

Let us return to the question,-Which is before us, as teachers in Wisconsin, phonetics or orthoepy? I answer, both, - orthoepy as the result, the valuable possession; phonetics as the scientific and most certain means by which to attain this result. But we need a convenient term under which to include them both as they enter, combined and properly related, into instruction. It is possible that the unlovely word phonics is the one most nearly fitted for the purpose, it having already acquired a specific application to such phonetic instruction for orthoepic purposes as has been given in the public schools of this country. But the word orthoepy has been used in like manner; and so, with your permission and some qualms of etymological conscience, I shall henceforth use it as the inclusive term.

We reach now the main question, what wisdom is there in our statutory recognition of orthoepy as one of the essential elements of a common-school education? Or, in other words, What is the educational function of phonics?

1. The study and knowledge of orthoepy, in some manner, is generally admitted to be an important auxiliary, or, indeed, part of the work of reading. A comprehensive analysis of that work will show it to include as its four grand divisions, (a) Management of the bodily organs; (b) Pronunciation, or orthoepy proper; (c) Comprehension, attained by "analysis of thought," and (d) Expression. Thus orthoepy forms one of the four quarters of the world of reading, while the phonetic processes of vocalization and articulation go far to make up another, the purely physical fourth, indicated under the first head, management of the body.

The necessity of good pronunciation to even the slightest claims as a reader, goes without arguing. Nor is this need simply a matter of accents, but of vocalization and articulation, the distinct, exact, and adequate utterance of all the oral elements employed. This cannot be left to mere random imitation. The attainment of a respectable, not to say, elegant, pronunciation will be greatly expedited, to say the very least, by the analytic processes of phonetics and a conscious knowledge of the formulated analogies, as well as the anomalies, of orthoepy proper.

And in teaching pupils of foreign extraction - no small matter in this state - this dependency upon phonic analysis becomes still greater, amounting, as I believe, to an absolute necessity. I deem it simply impossible to succcessfully put our th sound into a German mouth, for instance, without a resort to physiological analysis and description. So, the cure of lisping becomes merely a matter of perseverence when the physiological character of the fault is once understood.

Enunciation and comprehension are the two legs on which reading must go, if it goes at all; and to ask which of these could more safely be sacrificed, is like asking whether a pedestrian can better dispense with his right or his left leg. The whole physical hemisphere of reading, to change the figure, is closely akin. The training of the diaphragm for breathing, the larynx for vocalization, the tongue and

a

lips for articulation, — all, are not merely useful, economical in the end, but indispensable to any proficiency whatever in the rare art of good reading.

2. But I shall be asserting no novel or dubious proposition, I trust, when I affirm that the service of all this to reading is but a minor part of its whole value. Speech in general is vastly more important than oral reading. The whole is greater than a part. Conversation, public speaking, singing,- each and any of these more important to the doer than oral reading, for the time at least — are all made inmeasurably more effective by a knowledge of the elements and laws of vocal expression, and by training in the correct practices thereof. It will hardly be necessary to fortify the declaration that the great value of phonic drill is found in the daily and hourly speech of men. Its benefits are carried into every waking hour. A clear and resonant tone, clean-cut articulation, an easy and elegant execution of the vowel sounds, will render effective and inspiring a quality of thought which would be barely endurable when voiced by a rigid jaw, a clumsy lip, a feeble or husky vocalization, and an ignorant, rustic or provincial orthoepy.

3. Nor is this all. We live in a sensuous age, a time for the exaltation of the outward senses. Modern science is loudly emphasizing the value of high training for all these connections with the outer world. The value of eye-culture, especially, has been effectually impressed upon us. But is not the ear of equal worth? "The eye and the hand” are indeed incalculably serviceable, but are not the voice and the ear even more truly the servants of the soul? I judge that the deaf mute is more completely and unhappily set aside from contact and full communion with his nd than is the

The divine harmonies of music, the sympathetic thrill of the voice of orator or friend, -are not these a sorer loss than all the glories of color and of form? And the man of thick, dull ear and bungling, wooden mouth, is in a measure, deaf and dumb. His partially aborted organs of hearing and speech, are a muffling, deadening screen, which shuts him out from the highest ecstasies of this none too ecstatic life. But the man in question has this advantage over the totally deaf and dumb, his organs are more susceptible to cultivation. And for this cultivation just two means are at hand, music and phonics.

The infinite superiority of vocal to instrumental music, for this purpose, need not be discussed here. But phonic trainiug has in some respects an advantage over either, in that it attends to certain very

ind man.