Litters of Letters

by Jill Amadio

Were there ten fewer consonants and only three vowels in the English alphabet, here’s how two of the Bard’s indelible lines would have been written:

“Fr n mr th het f th sn…”  

“Th ly’s th  thg…”

Much of our English is derived from other languages, including Latin, French, Greek,  Italian, German and the aliens for all we know. In fact, our precious alphabet initially descended from the Egyptian Pro-Sinaitic alphabet around 1,800 B.C. The Phoenicians took it up, followed by the Greeks, then the Romans, who brought it to the British Isles during their disgraceful occupation, only to be shunted aside by the bloodthirsty Anglo-Saxons.  By the 13th century, we are told, the “modern English alphabet had emerged from the Old English alphabet.”

Earlier, the Chinese, other Asians, and Russians had invented their own enigmatic images to represent words, adding to our confusion. The strokes used to appear to bear no relation to letters as we know them, but then the vice-versa is also true.

Some writers are rather taken by the French influence whereby we tend to add acute and grave accents over certain letters, and also by the German umlaut of two tiny dots placed over specific vowels.

My keyboard doesn’t provide any of these extra  elegant little marks although to the left of my number 1 in the top row there is a funny little squiggle that resembles a drunken letter N: ~. I am sure it has great significance but the meaning escapes me sand I have never felt compelled to use it, even as an April Fool’s Day joke.

So, by the 13th century the Normans generously presented the Brits with their very own alphabet, and many of the world’s most remarkable English writers went full-tilt into turning out their extraordinary literature.

In my Oxford Dictionary of Quotations, a 1,000-page tome, there is only a single reference to the alphabet. It is from Charles Dickens’  The Pickwick Papers. He had one of his characters, Samievel, being advised that although “there were many things you don’t understand now, but…as the charity boy said when he got to the end of the alphabet, it’s a matter of taste.“

I think Dickens was indicating that knowing the alphabet was a choice but something a poor person may not have the opportunity to learn, if, indeed, he could even read English.

That should be the end of this saga but I became fascinated with my research. It turns out that we have been cheated. There were originally 29 letters in the English alphabet although three other letters were left out entirely: J, U, and W. I also  read that NATO  has its own phonetic alphabet to help members pronounce  English words during their lifelong luxury residence in America.

What’s so interesting now is how our words have come to mean something else entirely, such as “swatting,” “hacking,” and many others.

I wonder how these words translate into other languages, and if the message changes with the wind. Their double meanings will undoubtedly show up in dictionaries although the editors might want to wait a couple of years in case an even different and additional meaning pops up.

At least we still have our five vowels and 21 consonants with which to create characters, settings, plots, and strategies.

6 thoughts on “Litters of Letters”

  1. Interesting and thought-provoking article, Jill. I’m hooked on the English alphabet but at various times in my earlier years I learned the Greek and Hebrew alphabets as well. But I like using our own alphabet and figuring out how to spell things. And I’m reasonably good at it, considering the vowels and consonants I have to work with and how they sometimes are used in off-standard ways.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. I am personally happy with the English language since it does include words from many other languages even if we might not have some of those interesting dots and dashes over some of the letters. But when I see the “words” kids type on their cell phones today that are merely a handful of letters that stand for a beautiful word or two that they probably couldn’t spell if asked, I’m glad I went to school in the “newer age of enlightenment” and not in the world conceived by H.G. Wells in The Time Machine. Kids in that world didn’t read at all. I’m afraid kids today fall into that category. 26 letters work just fine…if you can read.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Interesting post, Jill. I found the bit about learning the alphabet, even if one is unable to read, particularly noteworthy. I’ve often said the alphabet are but tools in the writer’s toolbox. Your post illustrates once again that it’s not enough to have the tools, you have to know how to use them (to read), and use them properly (to write comprehensibly).

    Like

  4. What an intriguing study, Jill! I feel sad that today kids text ‘words’ without vowels and lose the beauty of our English language. Even though we know they are just in a hurry and being lazy. Like the others, I like our 26-letter alphabet. And I love our full English language and all the amazing writers who have utilized it, creating wonderful literary treats for us to devour.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Thanks, , everyone, for your comments, all food for thought. And yes, today,s young ‘uns prefer initials to words. At least we have fun figuring them out.,

    Like

Leave a comment