Chapter VIII: Part II: Chevrons (4)

In the Constitution of the External World, _Something_ is represented, as we have seen, by the solid and tangible substance which we call _Matter_, and _Nothing_ by the Expanse of Space.

In the Science of Acoustics, _Sound_, the pure _Phonos_, is the _Something_, the _Reality_, as it is denominated by Kant, the _Positive_ Factor of Speech. _Silence_ is the relative _Nothing_, the Negation, so called by Kant, the _Negative_ Factor of Speech. The Silences, or Intervals of Rest which intervene between Sounds (and also between Syllables, Words, Sentences, and still larger divisions of Speech), are only so many successive reappearances of this _negative_ element. Silence, the Nothing of Sound, is, in fact, in the most radical aspect of the subject, one entire half or hemisphere or equal Factor of the whole of Speech or Music. Josiah Warren, the author of a work entitled 'Music as an Exact Science,' is the only writer I have noticed who has had the discrimination _distinctively_ to recognize Silence as one of the Elements of the Musical Structure.

_Impliedly_ it is, however, always so recognized. The Silences intervening between tones _tunewise_, or in respect to altitude, are, in Musical Nomenclature, denominated _Intervals_. _Timewise_ Silences, or those which intervene between Tones rhythmically considered, are called _Rests_. The Intervals of Silence between Syllables and Words, in Oral Speech, are represented in the printed book by what the Printer calls _Spaces_, which are _blank_ or _negative_ Types interposed between the positive Types expressive of Sounds. This term _Space_ or _Spaces_ carries us to the analogous Total Space or Blank Space and intervening reaches of Space between the Planets, Orbs or Material Worlds, the former the corresponding _Nothing_ of the total Material Universe of which these worlds are the _Something_; as exhibited in the demonstrations of UNIVERSOLOGY.

In the Domain of Optics, covering the Phenomena of Light, Shade and Color, _Light_ is the _Positive_ Factor or _Something_, and _Darkness_ the _Negative_ Factor or _Nothing_. _Light_ is, therefore, the analogue of _Sound_, and _Darkness_ the analogue of _Silence_. That is to say, each of these two, Silence and Darkness, denote the absence, the lack, the want or the negation of the opposite and _Positive_ Element or Factor.

So in Thermotics, the Science of Heat, _Heat_ itself is the _Positismus_ or _Something_ of the Domain; and _Cold_ the _Negatismus_ or Correlative _Nothing_. _Heat_ is, consequently, the analogue of _Sound_ and _Light_; while _Cold_ is the analogue of _Silence_ and _Darkness_.

In respect to the Domain of Mind, _Positive Mental Experience_ (Feelings, Thoughts, and Volitions, including self-consciousness) are the _Positive_ Factor, the _Something_ of Mentality. _Inexperience_, the lack of mental exercitation, hence _Ignorance_, is the _Negative_ Factor, or _Nothing_. The Correspondential Relationship or Analogy existing between this Domain of the Universe and others already mentioned is testified to in a remarkable manner by our use of Language. We denominate the want of Feeling _Cold_ or _Frigidity_--in respect to the Mind or the individual character. The absence of Thought and Knowledge, or, in other words, Intellectual Barrenness, is called _Darkness_ or _Obscurity_ of the Mind. While the lack of Will or Purpose in the Mind is said to be the absence of _Tension_ or _Strain_ (the great Musical term); and the Stillness or quiet hence resulting may be appropriately designated as the _Silence_ of the Mind; Musical Silences being, as pointed out above, technically termed Rests.

With this superficial exhibition of the most radical aspect of the _Echo of Idea_ or _Repetition of Type_ which subsists between all the departments of the Universe, I pass to the more specific consideration of this Analogy as concerning the Domain of Thought and the Domain of Language.

Setting aside from our present consideration _Silence_, the _Negative_ factor or _Negatismus_ of Language, and fixing our attention upon _Sound_, the Positive factor or _Positismus_ of Language, we discover it to be composed of two constituents, _Vowels_ and _Consonants_.

The _Vowel_ is the _Substance_, the Reality of Language, and the _Consonant_ is the _Form_, the Limitation.

By _Vowel_ sound is meant the free or unobstructed, and as such unlimited flow of the vocalized or sounding breath. Vowels are defined in the simplest way as those sounds which are uttered with the month open; as _a_ (ah) in F_a_ther, _o_ in r_o_ll, etc.

Consonants are, on the contrary, those sounds which are produced by the crack of commencing or by obstructing, breaking, or cutting off the sounding breath, by completely or partially closing the organs of speech; as, for instance, by closing the lips, as when we pronounce _p_ie, _b_y, _m_y, etc.; or by pressing the point of the tongue against the gums and teeth, as when we say t_ie_, d_ie_, etc.; or by lifting the body of the tongue against the hard palate or roof of the mouth, as when we give the _k_ or hard _g_ sound, as in rac_k_, ra_g_, or in any other similar way.

Consonants are, therefore, the breaks or _limitations_ upon the otherwise unbroken and continuous vocality, voice, or vocalized breath. In other words, as already said, _Vowel_-Sound is the Elemental _Substance_, and _Consonant_-Sound the Elemental _Form_ of Language, or Speech. (By Vowels and Consonants are here meant, the Reader should closely observe, Vowel-_Sounds_ and Consonant-_Sounds_, as produced by the _Organs_ of _Speech_, and as they address themselves to the _Ear_, distinguished and wholly apart from the _letters_ or combinations of letters by which they are diversely represented to the _Eye_ in different languages.)

By a valid but somewhat remote analogy, the _Vowel_-Sounds of Language may be regarded collectively as the _Flesh_, and the _Consonant_-Sounds as the _Bone_ or _Skeleton_ of the Lingual Structure. Flesh is an _Analogue_ or Correspondential Equivalent of Substance. Bone or Skeleton, which gives _outline_ or _shape_ to the otherwise soft, collapsing, and lumpy flesh-mass of the Human or Animal Body, is an _Analogue_ of Correspondential Equivalent of Limitation or Form; as the framework of a house is the shaping or form-giving factor or agent of the entire structure.

_Vowel_-Sounds are soft, fluent, changeful, and evanescent. One passes easily into another by slight deviations of pronunciation, resulting from trivial differences in National and Individual condition and culture; like the Flesh of the animal, which readily decays from the Bony Skeleton, while the last remains preserved for ages as a fossil. The Vowel-Sounds so readily lose their identity, that they are of slight importance to the Etymologist or Comparative Philologist, who is, in fact, dealing in the _Paleontology_ of Language.

The _Consonants_ are, on the contrary, the _Fossils_ of Speech; bony and permanent representatives of Framework, of _Limitation_, of Form. Consonant-Sounds are also sometimes denominated _Articulations_. This word means _joinings_ or _jointings_. It is from the Latin _articulus_, a JOINT, and is instinctually applied to the Consonant-Sounds in accordance with their analogy with the _Skeleton_ of the Human or Animal System.

By an easy and habitual slide in the meaning of Words, a term like _Joint_ is sometimes used to denote the _break_ or _opening_ between parts, and sometimes to denote one of the parts intervening between such breaks; as when we speak of a _joint_ of meat, meaning thereby what a Botanist would signify by the term _Internode_, the stretch or reach or shaft of bone extending from one joint (break) to another, with the meat attached to it.

Consonants have, in like manner, a double aspect as Articulations or _Joints_. In a rigorous and abstract sense, the Consonant has no sound of its own. It is simply a break or interruption of Sound. Etymologically, it is from the Latin _con_, WITH, and _sonans_, SOUNDING; as if it were a mere accessory to a (vowel) Sound; the Vowels being, in that sense, the only sounds. In this sense, the Consonants are analogous with the mere cracks or opening _joints_, which intervene between the bones of the Skeleton. In other words, they are no sounds, but mere nothings; the analogy, in that case, of _Abstract_ Limitation.

Practically, on the contrary, the Consonant takes to itself such a portion of the vocalized or sounding breath which it serves primarily to limit, that it becomes not merely a sound ranking with the Vowel; but the more prominent and abiding sound of the two. It is in this latter sense, that it is the Analogue of the Bone.

In Phonography, as in Hebrew and some other Languages, the letters representing the Consonant-Sounds only are written or printed; the Vowel-Sounds being either represented by mere points added to the Consonant characters, or left wholly unrepresented, to be supplied by the intelligence of the Reader. The written words so constructed, represent the real words with about the degree of accuracy with which a skeleton represents the living man; so that the meaning can be readily gathered by the practised reader, by the aid of the context. In Phonography, the Consonant-Sounds, which are simple straight or curved lines, are joined together at their ends, forming an outline shape, somewhat like a single script (written) letter of our ordinary writing. These outline words are then instinctually and technically called _Skeleton-words_, from the natural perception of a genuine Scientific Analogy.

Consonants constitute, then, what may be denominated the _Limitismus_ (Limiting Domain) of Language. The Limit is primarily represented by the Line (a line, any line); then by the Line embodying Substance as _seam_, _ridge_, _bar_, _beam_, _shaft_, _or bone_; and, finally, by a System of Lines, Shafts or Bones which may then be jointed or limited in turn among themselves, forming a concatenation of Lines, Bars or Shafts, the framework of a machine or house or other edifice, or the ideal columnar and orbital structure of the Universe itself. All these conceptions or creations belong to the practical Limitismus, the Form Aspect or Framework of Being in Universals and in Particulars in every Sphere and Department of the Universe.

The _Limitismus_ of Being so defined then stands over against or contrasted with the _Substancismus_ (Substance-Domain) of Being which embraces the Substances, Materials or Stuffs of creation of whatsoever name that infill the interstices of the Framework or are laid upon it, and constitute the richness and fulness and plumpness of the Structure, as the Flesh does of the Body.

The wholeness or _Integrality_ of the structure then consists of the composity of these Two (Limitismus and Substancismus), as the wholeness of the Body consists of the Flesh and the Bone. The Consonants being the Limitismus, and the Vowels the Substancismus of Language; the Two united and coordinated comprise the Trinismal Integrality or Integralismus of Speech.

The Vowels denote, then, _Reality_, as distinguished from _Limitation_, or, what is nearly the same thing, _Substance_, as distinguished from _Form_.

There are in all _Seven_ (7); or if we include one somewhat more obscure than the rest, a kind of semi-tone, there are _Eight_ (8) full-toned, perfectly distinct and primary Vowel-Sounds, which constitute the Fundamental Vowel Scale of the Universal Alphabet. Their number and nature is governed by the Mechanical Law of their organic production in the mouth. And the number can only be increased by interposing minor shades of sound, as we produce minor shades of color by blending the Seven (7) Prismatic Colors. The new Sound will then belong, in predominance and as a mere variety, to one of these Seven (7) Primary Sounds.

These Seven (7) Sounds constitute the Leading Vowel-System of all Languages; with certain irregularities of omission in the Vowel-System of some Languages.

By the addition of Five (5) equally leading _Diphthongs_ (or Double Vowels) the number of leading Vowel representations is carried up to Twelve (12) or Thirteen (13)--which may then be regarded as the Completed Fundamental Vowel Scale of the Universal Lingual Alphabet.

_There are, in like manner, Seven (7)--or Eight (8)--Leading Realities of the Universe_, AND OF EVERY MINOR SPHERE OR DOMAIN OF BEING IN THE UNIVERSE, _which correspond with, echo or repeat, and are therefore the Scientific Analogues of, these Seven (7) Leading Vowel-Sounds, as they occur among the Elements of Speech_.

In representing the Vowel-Sounds, it is better, for numerous reasons, to use the letters with their general _European_ Values, than it is to conform to their altered or corrupted _English_ Values. For instance, the Vowel I (i) is pronounced in nearly every language of Europe, and in all those languages which the Missionaries have reduced to writing, as we pronounce _e_ or _ee_, or as _i_ in mach_i_ne, or p_i_que; E (e) is pronounced as we enunciate _a_ in paper; and A is reserved for the full Italian sound of _a_ (_ah_), as in father; _U_ is pronounced like _oo_, as in German, Spanish, Italian and many other languages.

The Seven (7) Vowels in question are then as follows:

1. I, i (_ee_ in f_ee_l).
2. E, e (_a_ in m_a_te).
3. A, a (_a_ in f_a_-ther).
4. _o_, _o_ (_aw_ in _aw_ful).
5. _u_, _u_ (_u_ in c_u_rd).
6. O, o (_o_ in n_o_-ble).
7. U, u (_oo_ in f_oo_l).

These sounds are produced in the middle, at the back, and at the front of the mouth respectively. These localities, and something of the nature of the sounds themselves, as _slender_ or _full_, will be plainly illustrated by the annexed figure:

3. Front- 1. Middle- 2. Back-
Mouth Mouth Mouth

ou i e (^a) a; _o_ _u_

The following description of the organic formation or production of these sounds now becomes important.

The Vowel-Sound I (ee) is the most slender and condensed of the Vowel-Scale. It is produced at the middle or central part of the mouth, by forcing a slight, closely-squeezed current of Sounding Breath, through a small, smooth channel or opening made by forming _a gutter or scoop of the flattened point of the tongue_; while, at the same time, the tongue is applied at the edges to the teeth and gums. This sound has, therefore, an actual _form_ resembling that of a thread or line; or still better, like that of a wire drawn through one of the iron openings by means of which wire is manufactured. It resembles also a slight, smooth, roundish stream of fluid escaping through a tube or trough.

This sound has relation, therefore, in the first place, to _Centrality_ or CENTRE; and then to LENGTH (or Line), which is the First Dimension of Extension. The I-sound continued or prolonged gives the idea of Length. But broken into Least Units of the same quality of Sound, we have individualized Vowel-Sounds of this quality, each one of which is a new _Centre_; like the successive _Points_ of which a _Line_ is composed.

An individual sound, I, has relation, therefore, to _Centre_ and to _Point_ generally. As such it stands representatively for the _Soul_ or _Identity_ or _Central Individuality of Being_--for that which gives to anything its distinctive character, as existing in the _Point_ or the _Unit_, or the _Atom_, or in any Individual Object or Thing from the Atom up to a World and to the Universe as a whole. _Identity_ is, perhaps, the best single term furnished by our Language to signify this basic idea. _Individuality_ approximates the meaning. It is the _pivotal_ notion of Being itself, and has relation, therefore, to Ontology, the Science of Abstract Being. _Essence_ and _Essential Being_ are terms which may also be used in defining it. The Reader should understand, however, that with reference to this Sound, as to those to be hereafter considered, there is no term or terms in any Language which will indicate their meaning _exactly_. The analysis of Ideas upon which UNIVERSOLOGY is based is more fundamental than any which has preceded it. Its Primary Conceptions are, therefore, broader and more inclusive than any former ones which existing terms are employed to denote. In explaining the meaning of these First Elements of Sound, then, as related to the First Elements of Thought, all that is now attempted is to convey as clear a notion of this meaning as is possible with our present terminology, without any expectation that the _precise_ meaning intended will be at once or entirely apprehended.

The sound E (_a_ in m_a_te) is likewise a slender, abstract-like, middle-mouth sound; but differs from I in the fact that it is produced by _flattening_ the opening for the Sounding Breath instead of retaining it in a roundish position. The angles of the mouth are drawn asunder, as if pointing outward to the sides of the head, and the sound is, as it were, _elongated in the crosswise direction_, as if a stick or a quill were held in the teeth, the extremities extending outward to the sides. A line, in this direction, is the measurer of BREADTH, which is the Second Dimension of Extension, crossing the Length-line represented by I at right angles. _Side-wise-ness_ is synonymous with RELATION, as one of the Sub-divisions of Reality, or, in other words, of the Realities of Being. _Re-lation_ is, etymologically, from the Latin _re_, BACK or REFLECTED, and _latus_, SIDE; that which mutually and reciprocally re-sides the _Centre_, or furnishes it with sides or _wings_. The Vowel-Sound E (_a_, in m_a_te) is, therefore, the Analogue or Corresponding Representative or Equivalent in the Domain of Sound of that _Fundamental Conception_ which, in respect to Thought, is denominated _Relation_, in respect to Position _Collaterality_ or _Sideness_, and in respect to Dimension _Breadth_ or _Width_.

The Sound A (_a_ in f_a_ther) is made farther back in the mouth, with the mouth stretched quite open, and is the richest and most harmonious of the Vowel Sounds--the Queen of the Vowels. It is the Italian A, the sound most allied with Music and Euphony, and yet a sound which is greatly lacking in the English Language.

The English Reader must guard himself from confounding the Vowel-Sound of which we are here speaking, with the Consonant R, the alphabetical name of which is by a lax habit of pronunciation made to be nearly identical with this Vowel-Sound; while for this beautiful and brilliant and leading Vowel in the Alphabet of Nature we have no distinct letter in English, and reckon it merely as one of the values or powers of the Letter A, to which we ordinarily give the value of E (_a_ in m_a_te, _ai_ in p_ai_n).

This Vowel A (_ah_, _a_ in f_a_ther) is made with the mouth so open that the form of its production suggests the insertion of a stick or other elongated object in a perpendicular direction to retain the jaws in their position; a practice said sometimes to be resorted to by the Italian Music Teacher, in order to correct the bad habit of talking through the teeth, common among his English pupils.

This height and depth involved in the Sound of the Vowel A (ah) relates it to THICKNESS, the Third Dimension of Extension; as the Sound I is related to _Length_, the First of these Dimensions, and the Sound E to _Breadth_, the Second of them.

_Thickness_ is again related to _richness_ and _sweetness_, to _fulness_ and _fatness_, as of the good condition of an Animal in flesh, or of rich and productive soils. And these ideas are again related to _wealth_ or to _riches_ generally; and, hence, again to SUBSTANCE. The objects of wealth are called _goods_, and a wealthy man is said to be a '_man of substance_.' A (ah) is the representative or pivotal Vowel; that one which embodies most completely the _Vowel Idea_. Its inherent meaning is especially, therefore, that of SUBSTANCE or REALITY, which, is, in a more general way, as we have seen, the meaning of all the Vowels. The most real, tangible, sensible substance from an ordinary point of view being. Matter, this Vowel-Sound allies itself also with _Matter_ or _Materiality_ as contrasted with _Spiritual_ Substance.

There is, it must now be observed, a flattened variety of A (ah), which will here be represented by the same letter italicized, thus, _A_, _a_, which is the so-called flat sound of A (ah) as when heard prolonged in m_a_re, pe_a_r, etc., or when stopped, in m_a_n, m_a_t, etc. This sound is intermediate in position between E and A (ah). That is to say, it is produced farther back in the mouth and with the mouth somewhat more open than when we say E, and not so far back as when we say A (ah); and with the mouth less open. As contrasted with the A (ah), it is a thin, flat, and slightly unsatisfactory and disagreeable sound, analogically related to the natural semitone _fa_ of the Diatonic Scale of Musical Tones. This Sound signifies accordingly, THINNESS, ATTENUATED MATTER, the Ghost or Spirit of Nature, related to Odic Force, Magnetisms, Electricity, etc.; still not, however, Spirit in the sense of Mind, or in the Religio-Spiritual sense of the word. This is the exceptional or bastard Vowel-Sound which has but an imperfect or half claim to be inserted in the Leading Vowel Scale. When inserted, its natural position is between the E and the A (ah), although for certain reasons it sometimes changes position with the A (ah), following instead of preceding it.

The next two Vowel-Sounds, _o_ (_aw_ in _aw_ful), and _u_ (_u_ in c_u_rd), are somewhat like the _a_ (_a_ in m_a_re), exceptional or bastard Sounds. They are unheard in many Languages, and unrecognized as distinct sounds in many Languages where they are, in fact, heard. Very few Languages have distinct Letter-Signs for them. In using the Roman Alphabet, I am compelled to adopt a contrivance to represent them; which is, as in the case of the _a_, to print them in italic types, for which, when the remainder of the word is in italic, small capitals are substituted, thus: _O_ful (awful); _U_rgent; or, in case the whole word is intended to be italicized, for the sake of emphasis, O_ful_, U_rgent_. In script or handwriting, the italic Letter is marked by underscoring a single line, and the small capital by underscoring two lines.

_O_ (aw) is the fullest of the Vowel-Sounds. It is made with the mouth still farther open than when we say A (ah), and somewhat farther back; or, rather, with the cavity enlarged in all directions, and especially deepened. The mouth is stretched in all ways to its utmost capacity, giving a hollow, vacant effect to the voice, instead of the rich, mellow and substantial sound of the A (ah). The Sound so produced is, nevertheless, on the one hand, a broader quality of the A (ah), and there is a strong tendency on the part of the A (ah) to degenerate into it, as when the uneducated German, says _Yaw_ for _Ja_ (yah). On the other hand, this sound has something of the quality of O. It is, therefore, intermediate in quality between A (ah) and O. In respect to meaning, it is the Type, Analogue, Equivalent, or Representative of Volume or SPACE, whether filled or unfilled by Substance. That is to say, it is the Analogue of Space, not in the sense in which we formerly regarded Space as the _negation_ of Matter; but in the sense of _Infinite Dimensionality_, or of Dimensionality in all directions, as a vague generalization from the three special dimensions _Length_, _Breadth_, and _Thickness_. It is, therefore, round or ball-like, and huge, and, in respect to the nature of the tone, vague and vacant.

Space _as mere nothing_ has no Letter-Sign in the Alphabet; but is represented by the blank types or spaces used by the printer to separate his syllables and words, as shown heretofore. Space _as a Department of Reality_, as one of the _Realities_ of the Universe, a bastard or semi-Reality it is true, but nevertheless, belonging to that Domain, is denoted by the Vowel-Sound _o_ (aw).

The Sound _u_ (uh, _u_ in c_u_rd), the fifth of the Scale, is called among Phoneticians, the _Natural_ Vowel. It is the simple, unmodulated or unformed vocal breath permitted to flow forth from the throat or larynx with no effort to produce any specific sound. It is the mere grunt, a little prolonged; the unwrought material out of which the other and more perfect Vowel Sounds are made by modulation, or, in other words, by the shapings and strains put upon the machinery of utterance. The Hebrew _scheva_, the French _eu_, and _e_ mute, are varieties of this easily-flowing, unmodulated, unstable, unsatisfactory sound. Like the _o_ (aw), this sound _u_ (uh) has a vacant, unfinished, and inorganic character as a sound, while yet, from its great fluency, its frequent occurrence tends, more than that of any other sound, to give to Language that conversational fluency, rapidity and ease which are especially characteristic of the French Tongue. From this same easy laxity of its nature all the other Vowel Sounds tend, in English particularly, when they are not accented, to fall back into this Natural Vowel; as in the following instances: Rom_a_n, brok_e_n, m_i_rth, mart_y_r, Bost_o_n, c_u_rd, etc.; words which we pronounce nearly Rom_u_n, brok_u_n, m_u_rth, mart_u_r, Bost_u_n, c_u_rd, etc.

This Sound, as to inherent meaning, is, by its alliance with the idea of flux, flow and continuity, the Type, Analogue, Equivalent or Representative in the Domain of Oral Sound of that _Fundamental Conception_ which, in respect to Idea, we denominate TIME; and of Stream-like or _Currental_ Being of all kinds.

_Space_, denoted by _o_ (aw), has relation to the Air as an atmosphere, and to the Ocean of Ether in filling the Great Spheral Dome of Empyrean or Firmament. The Vowel-Sound _u_ (uh) has a similar relation to Fluidity or Liquidity, and, hence, to Water as a typical fluid, to the Ocean Flux or Tide, to the Flowing Stream, etc. This Time-like idea is uni-dimensional or elongate in a _general_ or _fluctuating_ sense; not _specifically_ like I. It is in view of this characteristic, that it is broadly and primarily contrasted with the Spacic significance of _o_ (aw), which is omnidimensional.

The two remaining Vowel-Sounds, the O and U (oo), repeat the _o_ (aw) and _u_ (uh), in a sense, but in a new and more refined stage or degree of development. The sound O is made at the front mouth--the locality the most openly in sight of any at which Sound is produced--by rounding the lips into an irregularly-circular, face-like, or disk-like presentation. The O Sound so produced denotes Presence, as of an object by virtue of its reflection of Light; and, hence, LIGHT, _Clearness_, _Purity_, _Reflection_.

The U (_oo_ in f_oo_l) is an obscured or impure pronunciation of the O. The lips are protruded as if to say O; but not being sufficiently so for the production of the pure Sound, the Sound actually given is mixed, or made turbid or thick. The U-Sound denotes accordingly _Retiracy_, _Obscurity_, _Shade_, _Turbidity_, _Mixedness_, or _Impurity_, as of Colors in a dim light, or as of Materials in a slime or plasma, etc.

Metaphysically, O denotes PURE THEORY, the _Abstract_; and U (oo) signifies the ACTUAL or PRACTICAL, the Tempic, the Concrete (the Temporal or Profane), which is always mixed with contingency.

Other Vowel-Sounds, shades more or less distinct of some one of these Leading Sounds, are interspersed by nature between these _diatonic_ Sounds, like the half tones and quarter tones in Music. Two of these French _eu_ and _e muet_ modifications of _u_ (uh) have been mentioned. _Eu_ is modulated at the lips, and _e muet_ at the middle mouth, but both have the general character of _u_ (uh). The French U is a modification of the U (oo), of the Scale just given, but made finer, and approximating I (ee). The Italian O is a modification of _o_ (aw). These four are the Leading Semi-tone Sounds; which along with _a_ carry the Scale from Seven (7) diatonic up to twelve (12) chromatic. As they will be passed over for the present with this mere mention, the points of the Scale at which they intervene will not be now considered.

Discarding these minor shades of Sounds, the Leading Scale of Vowel-Sounds is augmented from Seven (7) or Eight (8) to Twelve (12) or Thirteen (13), by the addition of the following five (5) Diphthongs or Double Vowels. In respect to the _quality_ of Sound, they are pronounced just as the Vowels of which they are composed would be if separated and succeeding each other. To make the Diphthong _long_, the two Sounds are kept quite distinct. To make it _short_, they are closely blended; as, AU (ah-oo), long; A[)U] (ahoo), short. With no diacretical mark they are pronounced _ad libidum_, or neither very long nor short.

The following are the five (5) Diphthongs which complete the Vowel Scale:

The IU is composed of the first Vowel I (ee) and the last U (oo). The I-sound, so placed before another Vowel-Sound, tends readily to be converted into or more properly to prefix to itself the weak Consonant-Sound represented in English by Y (in German and Italian by J); thus YIU for IU. The whole of the three Sounds so involved (a real Triphthong) are represented by the English U long--which is never a _simple_ Vowel-Sound--as in _union_, pronounced _yioonyun_.

This Diphthong IU (or yiu) denotes _Conjunction_, _Conjuncture_, _Event_ (the two ends meeting); and also _Coupling_ or _Unition_; a central point between extremes.

The next and the most important of the Diphthongs (except AU) is AI, compounded of the third (A) and the first (I) of the simple Vowel-Sounds. It is pronounced very nearly like the English long I, as in p_i_ne, f_i_ne, etc., which is not a _simple_ Vowel; but is compounded of the two simple Vowels above mentioned (A and I, ahee) in a very close union with each other; or, as it were, squeezed into each other. The Tikiwa (Tee-kee-wah) combination (this is the name of the Scientific Universal Language), AI, is not ordinarily quite so close, and when pronounced _long_, is quite open, so that each Vowel is distinctly heard (ah-ee).

This Diphthong AI may be regarded as embracing and epitomizing the lower or ground wing or half of the Simple Vowel-Scale (I E _a_ A); its meaning is, therefore, that of BASIC or SUBSTANTIAL REALITY: the GROUND of Existence.

Contrasted with this is the next Diphthong, _O_I (aw-ee), compounded of the fifth (_o_) and the first (I) Vowel-Sounds. It is the Sound of _oy_ in b_oy_. The I contained in this Diphthong may be regarded as standing in the place of U at the other extremity of the Scale. This last Sound has a tendency to return into I through the French slender U, illustrating the Principle of the Contact of Extremes. The Diphthong _O_I may, therefore, be viewed as embracing and epitomizing the upper or ethereal wing or half of the Simple Vowel Scale (_o_ _u_ O U); its meaning is, therefore, that of AERIAL or ASCENDING REALITY; LOFTINESS or LOFT.

Next there occurs a Diphthong OI, pronounced as the same letters in the English word g_oi_ng, which has a half claim to be ranked with the Leading Diphthongs. It is sometimes reckoned into, and sometimes out of, the Scale--like _a_ among the Simple Vowels. Its meaning is that of FRONTNESS, PROSPECT.

Finally, the great Focal Diphthong, that which includes and epitomizes the whole Vowel Scale, is AU (ah-oo), compounded of the third Vowel-Sound (A) and the Seventh (or Eighth) U. It is the sound heard in _ou_r, or in the Spanish c_au_sa. The meaning of this Supreme Diphthong and general Vowel Representative is UNIVERSAL REALITY. It stands practically in the place of all the Vowels, in the Composition of Words of an inclusive meaning. That is to say, it integrates in its signification, all that is inherently signified by all the other Vowels.

While, however, AU is practically and usually the Representative, Analogue or Equivalent, in the Domain of Language, of Universal Reality among the Elements of Being, this is so _only in practice_. _Theoretically_, the Diphthong best adapted to represent this Idea is AO; the A and the O being, in a supreme sense, the two most prominent or leading Vowels. But it is a little difficult to retain the Organs of Utterance in the position which they must assume in order to pronounce these two Vowel-Sounds in conjunction. The organs readily and naturally slide into the easier position in which they utter AU. This is correspondential with the difficulty always experienced in adhering to _Pure Theory_ (O); and the natural tendency to glide from it, as ground too high for permanent occupation, into the more accommodating Domain of the _Practical_ (U).

The Full Scale of Vowel Sounds coupled with the Full Scale of the (Indeterminate) Realities of Universal Being is, therefore, as follows:

1. SOUNDS. 2. REALITIES OF BEING.

1. I, i (ee as in feel). ENTITY or IDENTITY (Centre, Least
Element, Essential Being,
Individuality).

2. E, e (a as in mate). RELATION (Sideness, Collaterality,
Adjectivity).

3. _A_, _a_ (a as in mare). UNSUBSTANTIALITY (Thinness, Ghost,
Apparition).

4. A, a (a as in fa-ther). SUBSTANCE (Thickness, Materiality,
Richness, Goodness).

5. _O_, _o_ (aw as in awful). SPACE (Volume, Expansion).

6. _U_, _u_ (u as in curd). TIME (Flux, Flow).

7. O, o (o as in noble). LIGHT (Reflection, Parity, Clearness,
Theory).

8. U, u (oo as in fool). SHADE (Retiracy, Turbidity, Mixture,
Practice).

9. IU, iu (YIU), (u in union, use). CONJUNCTION (Event, Joining).

10. AI, ai (ah-ee, i in fine). BASIC REALITY (Ground of Existence).

11. OI, oi (aw-ee, oy in boy). AERIAL or ASCENDING REALITY (Loft,
Loftiness).

12. _O_I, _o_i (o-ee, oi in going). FRONTNESS, PROSPECT.

13. AU, au (ou in our). UNIVERSAL REALITY.

The Vowels and Diphthongs of this Basic Scale may be Long or Short, without any change of quality. This difference is indicated by diacritical marks, which it is not now necessary to exhibit.

In addition to these merely _quantitative_ differences in the Vowel-Sounds, there is a corresponding difference of _Quality_, which produces a Counter-Scale of Vowel-Sounds; an echo or repetition of the Basic Scale throughout its entire length. This new Scale is a Series of Sounds predominantly _short_ in quantity. They are called by Mr. Pitman the _Stopped_ Vowels. (In German they are denominated the _Sharp_ Vowels.) These Sounds are nearly always followed by a Consonant-Sound in the same syllable, by which they are _stopped_ or _broken abruptly off_, and the purity of their quality as Vowels affected or disturbed.

It is not essential for our present purpose to give a detailed list of these Vowels; more especially as every Reader will readily recall them; as I, in pIn; E, in pEt; A in pAt; _o_, in n_o_t; _u_, in b_u_t; O, in stOne, cOAt; U, in fUll.

In respect to the Vowel Diphthongs, the _Stopped_ Sounds are not materially different from the _short_ quantities of the corresponding Full ones; and no effort need be made to distinguish the two former varieties of Sound. The same is true of the Short and Stopped Sounds of A (ah). But the difference is very marked in the remaining Seven (7) Simple Vowels; the Stopped Sounds of which are given above. For the ordinary purposes of Language it is not necessary to distinguish these Stopped Sounds by any diacritical mark. But in the short Root-Words, where a difference of meaning depends upon the difference between the _full_ and _stopped_ Vowel, the so-called _grave_ accent is employed to denote the _stopped_ quality, as pique, pick, for example, written thus: pik, pik.

The meaning of the Stopped Vowel-Sounds is merely the broken or _fractionized_ aspect of the same ideas which are symbolized by the corresponding _Full_ Vowel-Sounds.

The nature and meaning of the Vowels being thus explained with sufficient amplitude for the uses now in view, we are prepared to advance, in a subsequent paper, to the consideration of the individual Consonant-Sounds, their character and inherent signification.

THE TWO PLATFORMS.

It was the opprobrium of the Republican party in the Presidential campaign of 1860, that the Southern States were not, in any but a limited degree, represented in its ranks; and so it was called a sectional party. The Presidential campaign of 1864 is not less remarkable, on the other hand, because the party which now appropriates the honored name of Democratic seems to ignore the crime of rebellion on the part of those Southern States, and thus invites an even more obnoxious appellation. History will record with amazement, as among the strange phenomena of a war the most wicked of all the wicked wars with which ambition has desolated the earth (phenomena that will perplex men and women of loyal instincts and righteous common sense to the latest day), the resolutions of the Chicago Convention of 1864.

It is the purpose of this article to consider as dispassionately as may be, those Chicago resolutions, as well as the ones previously adopted at Baltimore; desiring to look at them both from the standpoint of a patriotism which loves the whole country as one indivisible nation--the gift of God, to be cherished as we cherish our homes and our altars.

A convention called of all those, without respect to former political affinities, who believed in an uncompromising prosecution of the war for the Union till the armed rebellion against its authority should be subdued and brought to terms, met at Baltimore on the 7th of June last, and nominated Abraham Lincoln, of Illinois, for reelection as President, and Andrew Johnson, of Tennessee, for election as Vice-President. The convention, with exceeding good sense, and obedient to the just and patriotic impulses of the people, disregarded all party names of the past, and called itself simply a National Union Convention. Two months later, and on the 29th of August last, obedient to the call of Democratic committees, a convention met at Chicago, composed of men whose voices were for peace, and nominated for President General George B. McClellan, of New Jersey, and for Vice-President George H. Pendleton, of Ohio. This convention took the name of Democratic, indicating thereby not the idea of the equal rule of all the people, as the name imports, but the traditions and policies of those degenerate days before the war, when Democracy had strangely come to mean the rule of a few ambitious men. In other words, it ignored the crime of those men (who have sacrificed their country to their ambition), and assumed that the country could also overlook the crime. It supposed the people ready to strike hands with rebellion and elevate the authors of rebellion to power again.

Perhaps the difference between the two conventions may be concisely stated thus: The Chicago Convention was for peace first, and Union afterward; the Baltimore Convention for Union first, then peace. Let us see.

THE CHICAGO PLATFORM.

We suppose that no one will think us wanting in fairness when we characterize the Chicago Platform as one of peace.[4] If there is any reproach in the term, it surely is not the fault of those who take men to mean what they say.

[Footnote 4: It is presumed that every one is familiar with the two platforms, as they are so easily obtained, and it is, therefore, not deemed necessary to encumber the pages of the Magazine with inserting them in full.]

Indeed, it is simply the truth to declare that the general impression on the first publication of it confirmed the view we have taken, and that even among the supporters of the convention there were many who proclaimed their confident expectation that General McClellan, if he should accept the nomination, would disregard the platform, and stake his chances on his own more warlike record. We will not stop to consider in this place whether that expectation has been fulfilled. It suffices for our present purpose to remind our readers that the great doctrine of the Democratic party of former days was expressed in the motto, 'Principles, not men;' and that the rigid discipline of the party has always required the nominee to be the mere representative of the platform--its other self, so to speak: as witness the case of Buchanan, who declared himself, following the approved formulas of his party, no longer James Buchanan, but the Cincinnati Platform. It ought also to be borne in mind, that General McClellan's letter of acceptance does not, in terms, repudiate the platform, and is not necessarily inconsistent with it.

The first one of the six resolutions that constitute the Chicago Platform, has the sound of true doctrine. 'Unswerving fidelity to the Union under the Constitution,' is the duty of every citizen, and has always been the proud war-cry of every party; and they who swerve from it are subject not simply to our individual censure, but to the sanction of our supreme law. The just complaint against this platform is, that, while thus proclaiming good doctrine, it overlooks the departure therefrom of a large portion of the people, misled by wicked men. When we look at the other resolutions, the first one seems all 'sound and fury, signifying nothing.'

Nor will we withhold what of approval may possibly be due, in strict justice, to the sixth and last resolution; although the approval can only be a limited one. No one can overlook the entire lack in that resolution of cordial sympathy with the sacred cause of nationality, to which the brave heroes of the war have given their lives and fortunes. It restricts itself to a simple recognition of the 'soldiery of our army,' as entitled to 'sympathy,' with a promise of 'protection' to them, 'in the event of our attaining power.' It ignores the navy, and passes by the gallant heroes who on sea and river have upheld the flag of our country with a lustre that pales not before the names of Paul Jones, and Perry, and Decatur. Moreover, the sympathy 'extended to the soldiery' is the sympathy not of the American people, but of 'the Democratic party.' Surely, this phrase was ill conceived. It has a touch of partisan exclusiveness that is sadly out of place. But the resolution is unpartisan and patriotic in another respect that deserves notice. It extends the 'sympathy of the Democratic party to the soldiery of our army,' without making any discrimination to the prejudice of the negro soldiers; and thus commits the 'Democratic party,' with honorable impartiality, to the 'care and protection' of _all_ 'the brave soldiers of the Republic.'

With these criticisms upon the first and sixth resolutions, we proceed to record our total disapprobation of the remaining four. In all candor, we contend that those four resolutions are a surrender of the national honor, and a violation of the national faith. They are unworthy the old glory of the Democratic party. For what is the purport of them? Is it condemnation of a rebellion that has 'rent the land with civil feud, and drenched it in fraternal blood'? Is it to stimulate the heroism of those whose breasts are bared to the bullets of traitors in Virginia and Georgia, and who have 'borne aloft the flag and kept step to the music of the Union' these three years and a half in unwearied defence of the nation? Ah, no; they declare the war a 'failure'! The second resolution is the keynote of the platform, reciting 'that after four years (three years and a half) of _failure_ to restore the Union by the _experiment of war_,... justice, humanity, liberty, and the public welfare demand that _immediate efforts be made for a cessation of hostilities_.' Upon this resolution there can be no better comment than the remembrance of Donelson and Pea Ridge, Pittsburg Landing and Vicksburg, Murfreesboro' and Chattanooga, Antictam and Gettysburg; not to speak of that splendid series of battles from the Wilderness to Petersburg, which at last has brought the rebel general to bay; nor of the glorious victories, since the Chicago Convention, at Mobile and Atlanta, and in the Shenandoah Valley. It can never be forgotten that on the fourth of July, 1863, Governor Seymour, in a public discourse at the Academy of Music, in New York, drew a deplorable picture of the straits to which the nation was at last reduced, with the enemy marching defiantly across the fertile fields of Pennsylvania, and men's hearts failing them for fear of danger, not alone to the political capital, Washington, but also to the financial capital, New York; and that, even while the words fell from the speaker's lips, that defiant enemy, already beaten, was rapidly retreating before the magnificent old Army of the Potomac at Gettysburg: while victorious Grant had already broken the left of the rebel line, and was celebrating the nation's anniversary in the triumph of Vicksburg. Even so, let it never be forgotten that the delegates who adopted this second resolution, so burdened with despair, had scarcely reached their homes, ere the stronghold of the Southern Confederacy, which, ever since the war was begun, has been boastfully proclaimed the key of its military lines, and as impregnable as Gibraltar, fell before the unconquerable progress of the armies of the West, under General Sherman; and thus the rebel centre, as well as left, had been broken, and only the rebel right, at Richmond, yet remains to the Southern army.

In further answer to the discouraging language of this resolution, let us offset the following terse and comprehensive statement of what has been accomplished in the course of the nation's 'experiment of war.' It is copied from _The Evening Post_ of a recent date, and the writer supposes the soldiers to speak thus:

'We have not failed; on the contrary, we have fought bravely and
conquered splendidly. In proof of our words we can point to such
trophies as few wars can equal and none surpass. Besides defending
with unusual vigilance and completeness two thousand miles of
frontier, in three years we have taken from the enemies of the
Union, by valor and generalship, thirty complete and thoroughly
furnished fortresses; we have captured over two thousand cannon; we
have reconquered and now hold nearly four thousand miles of
navigable river courses; we have taken ten of the enemy's principal
cities, three of them capitals of States; in thirty days last
summer we captured sixty thousand prisoners; we have penetrated
more than three hundred miles into the territory claimed by the
enemy; we have cut that territory into strips, leaving his armies
without effectual communication with each other; the main
operations and interests of the war, which were lately concentrated
about Baltimore, Paducah, and St. Louis, have been transferred, by
our steady and constant advance, to the narrow limits of the
seaboard Slave States; we hold every harbor but one, of a coast six
thousand miles long. And whatever we have taken we hold; we have
never turned back, or given up that which we once fairly
possessed.'

It has, however, been fittingly reserved for the chief of the rebellion himself to give the full and complete answer to this dishonorable complaint of failure. Not a month after the meeting of the Chicago Convention, and on the 23d of September last, Jeff. Davis uttered these words, in a public speech, at Macon, Geo.: '_You have not many men between eighteen and forty-five left_.... Two-thirds of our men are absent, some sick, some wounded, but _most of them absent without leave_. ... _In Virginia the disparity of numbers is just an great as it is in Georgia._'

But let it be granted that after these three years and a half of war, and having accomplished such unquestionably important results, the Union is not yet restored, what then? Is that a reason for giving up now? Our fathers fought the British seven years without flinching; and under the indomitable leader God had given them, they would have fought seven years longer with equal determination. Are we less determined than they were? Are we such degenerate sons that we are willing to give up the legacy they left us, at half its original cost? There is just the same reason that we should yield the contest now as there was in 1861 that we should yield it then; neither more nor less. The integrity of the nation, the perpetuity of our institutions, the safety, honor, and welfare of the people are still at stake.

If it is true that 'justice, humanity, liberty, and the public welfare demand that immediate efforts be made for a cessation of hostilities,' then those same holy principles were assailed when the war was begun. If the United States Government was the assailant, it did wrong, and has continued doing wrong ever since; and not a century of such wrong-doing can make the war just and right on our part. This brings us face to face with the question, Who began the war? Who, in this contest, has assailed the principles of 'justice, humanity, and liberty'? Who has attacked the 'public welfare'? Has it been the United States Government? Let us revert to the occasion of the war. Confining ourselves to what all parties admit--even the rebels themselves--the immediate occasion of the war was the election of a President distasteful, for whatever cause, to the Southern leaders. Abraham Lincoln was elected President of the United States under the organic law of the nation, in strict accordance with all its modes and requirements, and none ever disputed the fairness of the election. That organic law is the Constitution, to which the South is bound equally with the North. The men of the Chicago Convention, who have recalled to our minds its high supremacy, neglected to express their opinion of those who, immediately on the election of President Lincoln, contemptuously spurned it, and have sought these three years and a half to overthrow it and destroy the Union which it upholds.

Every sentiment of 'justice' was outraged when wicked sedition thus without cause reared its head against the covenant of the nation. Every instinct of 'humanity' was stifled by the traitors who surrounded a gallant garrison of seventy men with a force of ten thousand, and opened fire on the heroes who stood by the flag that had been the glory and defence of both for more than half a century. 'Liberty,' in all its blessed relations of home, and country, and religion, was struck at when blind ambition thus set at defiance the power of the Union, to which liberty owes its life on this continent, and its hopes throughout the world. The constitutional liberty that is the glory of our civilization, the liberty regulated by law that is the pride of our institutions, was attacked by those who at Montgomery fiercely defied the Constitution and laws. And what shall we say of the constitution which these traitors to their country and humanity affected to establish, instead of that, the heritage of their and our Washington and his compeers, which had made our country powerful among nations, and blessed it with equal laws and equal protection to all? What shall we say of the constitution that ordained slavery as the corner stone of a new confederacy, to teach mankind the folly of Christian civilization, and bring back the 'statelier Eden' of the dark ages? To which party in this terrible strife of brothers does 'liberty' look for protection to-day? Which of the two armies of brothers now arrayed against each other on the plains of Virginia and Georgia, is fighting for the principle of order, which is the 'public welfare'? Let these questions be answered, and then it will appear how much reason there is in the declaration that 'liberty, justice, humanity, and the public welfare' demand the 'cessation of hostilities.' On the contrary, these very principles demand that the war be continued without abatement till they are guaranteed safe residence and sure protection under the United States Constitution.

But, it is objected, you ignore the basis on which, this 'cessation of hostilities' is proposed, namely, 'the Federal Union of the States.' There is a word to be said in reference to this clause which will illustrate the high-toned patriotism of some of the convention which adopted it. There was an alteration in the wording of the resolution, and some of the papers printed it accordingly, '_the basis of the Federal States_.' The editor of the _New York Freeman's Journal_ (a paper which zealously supports the Chicago platform and all peace measures, and is called Democratic), being requested to explain which version was correct, said, in a late issue of his journal, that in the original draft of the resolution 'it was not the _bold doctrine_ of Federal States;' it was the _delusion and snare_ of a Federal 'Union,' and that therefore the latter must be taken as the correct version.