Society for Pure English, Tract 02 - On English Homophones by Robert Seymour Bridges;Society for Pure English
page 40 of 94 (42%)
page 40 of 94 (42%)
![]() | ![]() |
|
An objector who should plead that homophones are not a nuisance might
allege the longevity of the Chinese language, composed, I believe, chiefly of homophones distinguished from each other by an accentuation which must be delicate difficult and precarious. I remember that Max Müller [1864] instanced a fictitious sentence ba bà bâ bá, 'which (he wrote) is said to mean if properly accented _The three ladies gave a box on the ear to the favourite of the princess._' This suggests that the bleating of sheep may have a richer significance than we are accustomed to suppose; and it may perhaps illustrate the origin as well as the decay of human speech. The only question that it raises for us is the possibility of distinguishing our own homophones by accentuation or by slight differentiation of vowels; and this may prove to be in some cases the practical solution, but it is not now the point in discussion, for no one will deny that such delicate distinctions are both inconvenient and dangerous, and should only be adopted if forced upon us. I shall assume that common sense and universal experience exonerate me from wasting words on the proof that homophones are mischievous, and I will give my one example in a note[8]; but it is a fit place for some general remarks. [Footnote 8: The homophones sun = son. There is a Greek epigram on Homer, wherein, among other fine things, he is styled, [Greek: Ellanon biotae deuteron aelion] which Mackail translates 'a second sun on the life of Greece'. But _second son_ in English means the second male child of its parents. It |
|