Longley: Phonetic Specimens
Wed Sep 16, 2026 · 4674 words · 24 min

This oddment collects a selection of English-language texts presented in various phonetic alphabets in Unicode so as to serve as a type specimen of sorts for Longley, a digital typeface designed to support these texts. This page will be updated as Longley continues to evolve.

A Technical Note

Longley supports a number of OpenType features, including ligatures, localized forms, tabular and lining figures (digits), many character variants, and a limited number of numerators, denominators, and small capitals to support a minimal set of vulgar fractions and small capitals known from the Longley Brothers’ publications. Of particular note for this page, however, are the stylistic sets designed to highlight different versions of phonotypy.

By default, Longley uses letterforms from the 1854 American Phonetic Alphabet. However, as several phonotypic letters (most notably the phonotypic t [𝽹]) have a different appearance in one or more of the major revisions of the English and American Phonetic Alphabets, Longley features three additional stylistic sets, ss03, ss04, and ss05, designed to render the appropriate letterforms for the 1847, 1856, and 1868 versions of Pitman’s phonotypic alphabets respectively, and these stylistic sets have been used in this page where appropriate. (The 1860 and 1871 versions of Pitman’s alphabets use the same letterforms as the previous versions of 1856 and 1868, respectively, so no additional stylistic sets are needed for them.)

Also, as Longley lacks a proper italic at this time, text on this page (and others) currently employs the underline as a substitute for italics. In addition, text shadow is employed to highlight text that is known to be incorrect in the source material and nevertheless copied as is (i.e. text that would be marked with “[sic]” in a typical quotation).

Finally, one linguistic note: oblique lines (slashes) placed around text are employed here and in other pages to identify phonemes using the International Phonetic Alphabet, while square brackets are used to identify specific (phonotypic) letters and punctuation.

The North Wind and the Sun

This classic Aesop fable has become a standard parallel text to illustrate the phonology of different languages, particularly as presented in the Handbook of the International Phonetic Association. Below, I present my own transcriptions of the English language text based on the wording employed by Peter Ladogefed in the illustration of Usonian English in that volume, informed by the pronunciations of words given in B.H. Smart’s 1836 pronouncing dictionary Walker Remodelled (for the 1847 English Phonotypic Alphabet and subsequent versions of the English Phonetic Alphabet) and Dan Smalley’s 1855 American Phonetic Dictionary of the English Language (for the 1854 American Phonetic Alphabet).

1999 Standard Usonian English Orthography

The North Wind and the Sun were disputing which was the stronger, when a traveler came along wrapped in a warm cloak. They agreed that the one who first succeeded in making the traveler take his coat off should be considered stronger than the other. Then the North Wind blew as hard as he could, but the more he blew the more closely did the traveler fold his cloak around him; and at last the North Wind gave up the attempt. Then the Sun shined out warmly, and immediately the traveler took off his cloak. And so the North Wind was obliged to confess that the Sun was the stronger of the two.

1847 English Phonotypic Alphabet

The English Phonotypic Alphabet of 1847 was the first widely used phonotypic alphabet, seeing use in both England and the United States of America. This presentation uses spellings based on the pronunciations provided in the 1836 pronouncing dictionary Walker Remodelled.

Ƌɛ Nɵr𝽹 Wind ɑnd đɛ Sun wer disp𝽻tiŋ hwiꞔ woz đɛ stroŋger, hwen a trɑveler cam ɋloŋ rɑpt in a wɵrm clɷc. Ƌa ɋgrɛd đɑt đɛ wun hɯ ferst sucsɛded in maciŋ đɛ trɑveler tac hiz cɷt of ʃ𝽽d bɛ considerd stroŋger đɑn đɛ uđer. Ƌen đɛ Nɵr𝽹 Wind blɯ ɑz hɋrd ɑz hɛ c𝽽d, but đɛ mɷr hɛ blɯ đɛ mɷr clɷsli did đɛ trɑveler fɷld hiz clɷc ɋrɤnd him; ɑnd ɑt lɑst đɛ Nɵr𝽹 Wind gav up đɛ ɑtemt. Ƌen đɛ Sun ʃ𝽯nd ɤt wɵrmli, ɑnd imɛdɛatli đɛ trɑveler t𝽽c of hiz clɷc. And sɷ đɛ Nɵr𝽹 Wind woz ɷbl𝽯jd t𝽽 confes đɑt đɛ Sun woz đɛ stroŋger ov đɛ tɯ.

1854 American Phonetic Alphabet (The Cincinnati Alphabet)

This presentation of the 1854 American Phonetic Alphabet uses the spellings in Dan Smalley’s 1855 American Phonetic Dictionary of the English Language for words that otherwise use the mid central vowel (schwa) /ə/ in Ladogefed’s transcriptions. It also makes use of the diacritic conventions of B𝽯ografiz ov đɛ Prezidents ov đɛ Y𝽻n𝽯ted Stꞛts [Biographies of the Presidents of the United States] for indicating syllabic stress, which were originally employed by Alexander John Ellis in his work Ƌɛ Esenʃɑls ov Fɷnetics [The Essentials of Phonetics].

Ƌɛ Nɵr𝽹 Wind and đɛ Sun wẹr disp𝽻́tiŋ hwiꞔ woz đɛ stroŋger, hwen ɑ traveler kꞛm alóŋ rapt in ɑ wɵrm klɷk. Ƌꞛ agrɛ́d đat đɛ wun h𝽵 fẹrst suksɛ́ded in mꞛkiŋ đɛ traveler tꞛk hiz kɷt of ʃ𝽽d bɛ konsíderd stroŋger đan đɛ uđer. Ƌen đɛ Nɵr𝽹 Wind bl𝽵 az hɋrd az hɛ k𝽽d, but đɛ mɷr hɛ bl𝽵 đɛ mɷr klɷsli did đɛ traveler fɷld hiz klɷk arɤ́nd him; and at lɑst đɛ Nɵr𝽹 Wind gꞛv up đɛ atémt. Ƌen đɛ Sun ʃ𝽯nd ɤt wɵrmli, and imɛ́diꞛtli đɛ traveler t𝽽k of hiz klɷk. And sɷ đɛ Nɵr𝽹 Wind woz ɷbl𝽯́jd t𝽽 konfés đat đɛ Sun woz đɛ stroŋger ov đɛ t𝽵.

1856 English Phonetic Alphabet

Following growing dissatisfaction with the 1847 alphabet, Isaac Pitman began to once again experiment with his phonotypic alphabet, which stabilized again for a time beginning in 1856. In the meanwhile, Pitman had returned to the “continental” vowel scale previously used in several prototype alphabets between 1845 and 1846, and now preferred to analyze diphthongs and affricates as digraphs, among several other changes.

Ƌ𝽰 Nɷr𝽹 Wind and đ𝽰 S𝽿n wer dispiutiŋ hwitc woz đ𝽰 stroŋger, hwen ɛ traveler kɛm 𝽫loŋ rapt in ɛ wɷrm kl𝽳k. Ƌɛ 𝽫gr𝽰d đat đ𝽰 w𝽿n hɯ ferst s𝽿ks𝽰ded in mɛkiŋ đ𝽰 traveler tɛk hiz k𝽳t of cud b𝽰 konsiderd stroŋger đan đ𝽰 𝽿đer. Ƌen đ𝽰 Nɷr𝽹 Wind blɯ az h𝽫rd az h𝽰 kud, b𝽿t đ𝽰 m𝽳r h𝽰 blɯ đ𝽰 m𝽳r kl𝽳sli did đ𝽰 traveler f𝽳ld hiz kl𝽳k 𝽫round him; and at last đ𝽰 Nɷr𝽹 Wind gɛv 𝽿p đ𝽰 atemt. Ƌen đ𝽰 S𝽿n caind out wɷrmli, and im𝽰d𝽰ɛtli đ𝽰 traveler tuk of hiz kl𝽳k. And s𝽳 đ𝽰 Nɷr𝽹 Wind woz 𝽳blaidjd tu konfes đat đ𝽰 S𝽿n woz đ𝽰 stroŋger ov đ𝽰 tɯ.

1860 English Phonetic Alphabet

Pitman continued to occasionally make minor modifications to the vowels of his phonotypic alphabet into the 1860s, altering his analysis of several diphthongs and substituting the now-unused ram’s horn [ɤ] for the reversed u [𝽿] that had been used from 1856 to represent the open-mid back rounded vowel /ʌ/.

Ƌ𝽰 Nɷr𝽹 Wind and đ𝽰 Sɤn wer dispiutiŋ hwitꞔ woz đ𝽰 stroŋger, hwen ɛ traveler kɛm 𝽫loŋ rapt in ɛ wɷrm kl𝽳k. Ƌɛ 𝽫gr𝽰d đat đ𝽰 wɤn hɯ ferst sɤks𝽰ded in mɛkiŋ đ𝽰 traveler tɛk hiz k𝽳t of ꞔud b𝽰 konsiderd stroŋger đan đ𝽰 ɤđer. Ƌen đ𝽰 Nɷr𝽹 Wind blɯ az h𝽫rd az h𝽰 kud, bɤt đ𝽰 m𝽳r h𝽰 blɯ đ𝽰 m𝽳r kl𝽳sli did đ𝽰 traveler f𝽳ld hiz kl𝽳k 𝽫round him; and at last đ𝽰 Nɷr𝽹 Wind gɛv ɤp đ𝽰 atemt. Ƌen đ𝽰 Sɤn ꞔeind out wɷrmli, and im𝽰d𝽰ɛtli đ𝽰 traveler tuk of hiz kl𝽳k. And s𝽳 đ𝽰 Nɷr𝽹 Wind woz 𝽳bleidjd tu konfes đat đ𝽰 Sɤn woz đ𝽰 stroŋger ov đ𝽰 tɯ.

1868 English Phonetic Alphabet

1868 brought the final major revision to Pitman’s phonotypy, restoring letters for English affricates and some dipththongs. This required a new letter to once again be designed for the open-mid back rounded vowel /ʌ/, now a turned alpha [ɒ].

Ƌ𝽰 Nɷr𝽹 Wind and đ𝽰 Sɒn wer disp𝽻tiŋ hwiꞔ woz đ𝽰 stroŋger, hwen ɛ traveler kɛm 𝽫loŋ rapt in ɛ wɷrm kl𝽳k. Ƌɛ 𝽫gr𝽰d đat đ𝽰 wɒn hɯ ferst sɒks𝽰ded in mɛkiŋ đ𝽰 traveler tɛk hiz k𝽳t of ʃud b𝽰 konsiderd stroŋger đan đ𝽰 ɒđer. Ƌen đ𝽰 Nɷr𝽹 Wind blɯ az h𝽫rd az h𝽰 kud, bɒt đ𝽰 m𝽳r h𝽰 blɯ đ𝽰 m𝽳r kl𝽳sli did đ𝽰 traveler f𝽳ld hiz kl𝽳k 𝽫rɤnd him; and at last đ𝽰 Nɷr𝽹 Wind gɛv ɒp đ𝽰 atemt. Ƌen đ𝽰 Sɒn ʃ𝽯nd ɤt wɷrmli, and im𝽰d𝽰ɛtli đ𝽰 traveler tuk of hiz kl𝽳k. And s𝽳 đ𝽰 Nɷr𝽹 Wind woz 𝽳bl𝽯jd tu konfes đat đ𝽰 Sɒn woz đ𝽰 stroŋger ov đ𝽰 tɯ.

1871 English Phonetic Alphabet

Still dissatisfied with the letterform of the open-mid back rounded vowel /ʌ/ that had plagued him ever since returning to the “continental” vowel scale, Pitman continued to tinker with his alphabet into the 1870s, when he again assigned the ram’s horn to that role and chose to analyze the diphthong /au/ as a digraph as a result.

Ƌ𝽰 Nɷr𝽹 Wind and đ𝽰 Sɤn wer disp𝽻tiŋ hwiꞔ woz đ𝽰 stroŋger, hwen ɛ traveler kɛm 𝽫loŋ rapt in ɛ wɷrm kl𝽳k. Ƌɛ 𝽫gr𝽰d đat đ𝽰 wɤn hɯ ferst sɤks𝽰ded in mɛkiŋ đ𝽰 traveler tɛk hiz k𝽳t of ʃud b𝽰 konsiderd stroŋger đan đ𝽰 ɤđer. Ƌen đ𝽰 Nɷr𝽹 Wind blɯ az h𝽫rd az h𝽰 kud, bɤt đ𝽰 m𝽳r h𝽰 blɯ đ𝽰 m𝽳r kl𝽳sli did đ𝽰 traveler f𝽳ld hiz kl𝽳k 𝽫round him; and at last đ𝽰 Nɷr𝽹 Wind gɛv ɤp đ𝽰 atemt. Ƌen đ𝽰 Sɤn ʃ𝽯nd out wɷrmli, and im𝽰d𝽰ɛtli đ𝽰 traveler tuk of hiz kl𝽳k. And s𝽳 đ𝽰 Nɷr𝽹 Wind woz 𝽳bl𝽯jd tu konfes đat đ𝽰 Sɤn woz đ𝽰 stroŋger ov đ𝽰 tɯ.

Assorted Other Samples

A Poem by Howard Durham

The following poem, which is presented as it was printed in the 15 February 1850 issue of Ƌɛ Fɷnetic Advɷcat [The Phonetic Advocate] (vol. 2, p. 176, available ɑt HathiTrust), was written by Howard Durham, a New Jersey shoemaker by trade with literary ambitions. Durham had moved to Cincinnati in 1847 to engage in business as a shoemaker, but following the support of his friends, he soon moved into literary pursuits, looking to publish his own poetry and promote the prose and verse written by others. By the early 1850s, Durham had become publisher of a series of literary magazines specializing in literature written in the Cincinnati region and points west, most notably in his periodical The Genius of the West. A series of misfortunes following his departure from The Genius culminated in his untimely death from cholera in 1855 at the age of 27.

One notable byproduct of phonotypic printing as practiced by the Longley brothers can be seen in the inconsistency between the first word on line 1 and that of line 18. Much of the correspondence printed by the brothers had been written in (and transcribed to phonotypy from) Pitman’s shorthand, rather than phonetic longhand which used handwritten forms of phonotypic words. It is therefore probable that the word “ɛr” in line 1 should have been printed “ar” (for the romanic word “ere”) as it was in line 18, as the two vowel signs are distinguished only slightly by location in Pitman’s shorthand.

“Let mɛ d𝽯 hwen đɛ Sumur d𝽯z”
b𝽯 Hɤurd Durham

Let mɛ d𝽯 hwen đɛ sumur d𝽯z—let mɛ dɛpɋrt
    ɛr đɛ lɛf tɛrz ov nat𝽻r ɋr mɷrnf𝽽li spred:
hwen de𝽹s dɑmp ʃɑl cwenꞔ đɛ fant flam ov m𝽯 hɋrt
    bɛ đɛ waliŋ ov ɵtum đɛ durj ɷr m𝽯 bed.

Hwen đɛ burdz sɛs đar sɯđiŋ ꞔ𝽯mz, let m𝽯 soŋ sɛs;
    hwen đa pinyun đar fl𝽯t for a br𝽯t bɤurz blɯm,
ɷ let m𝽯 sɷl pɑs wiđ đɛ ɑnjels ov pɛs
    tɯ its br𝽯t j𝽻eld mɑnʃun hɯz dɷr iz đɛ tɯm.

Hwen đɛ burdz raz đar soŋz ɑgen, 𝽯 tɯ wil siŋ
    đɛ soŋz hwiꞔ ur𝽹s m𝽻zic hɑ𝽹 nevur yet tɷld,
unmiŋgʼld wiđ sɑdnes mid bɤurz ov spriŋ,
    hwar đɛ strɛmlets ov glɷri flɷ ɷr đɛ br𝽯t gɷld.

Let mɛ j𝽳n in đɑt melɷdi đar tɯ dispel
    đɛ dɋrc misti halɷz nɤ huvuriŋ nɛr,
hwar nevur ɑgen in m𝽯 b𝽽zʼm wil swel
    ɛmɷʃunz ov sorɷ tɯ stɋrtʼl a tɛr.

Let mɛ d𝽯 hwen đɛ sumur d𝽯z—let mɛ dɛpɋrt
    ar đɛ cɛn blɑsts ov ɵtum ɑloŋ đɛ valz mɷn,
hwen đɛ sumur ꞔ𝽯mz sɛs ɑnd đɛ ɵtum walz stɋrt
    let đar durj ɑt đɛ dɷr ov đɛ grav bɛ m𝽯 ɷn.

—Mt. Hel𝽹i, ꟝., Feb. 1850.

A Letter to the Editor

This letter is presented with only minor typographical adjustments from the original included in the 10 November 1855 issue of Type of the Times and was written in response to a series of pieces that began with the publication of an article entitled “Spiritual Marriage and Free Love,” by L.A. Hine, a regular contributor to the paper. While the original article may have been printed on four missing pages from the digitized copy of the issue dated 29 September, likely it, and certainly the response printed in the 20 October issue (and not the 13th as noted in the letter; a correction to this effect is noted only in pencil on the first page of the digitized issue) were printed in romanic type, not the phonotypic type of this letter. Several instances of romanic type are preserved from the original and marked as such.

“MR. H𝽮NZ KONSISTENSI.”

Mr. Editor:— Y𝽵r korespondent, “Ɑ W𝽽man,” in đɛ T𝽯p ov Okt. 13𝽹, kɵld Mr. H𝽯n t𝽽 akɤnt fɵr sum ekspreʃonz in hiz ɋrtikl on Marij, hwiꞔ, wiđ meni uđer lꞛdiz, 𝽯 woz glad t𝽽 sɛ. But đ𝽩r ɋr stil wun ɵr t𝽵 p𝽳nts, đɛ unsɤndnes ov hwiꞔ 𝽯 wiʃ t𝽽 prɛzent.

Fɵr instans, hɛ givz đɛ “naty𝽻ral intelekty𝽻al infɛriority ov w𝽽man” az ɑ rɛzon fɵr hẹr “konstansi.” Ƌis iz ɑ strꞛnj pɷziʃon fɵr ɑ lekty𝽻rer on đɛ hapi efekts ov intelekty𝽻al dɛvelopment—a left-handed compliment t𝽽 intelijens. “Ƌɛ naty𝽻ral intelekty𝽻al infɛriority ov w𝽽man iz, in jeneral, ɑ sufiʃent garantɛ ov konstansi.” Hwot an ekspreʃon from ɑ Rɛfɵrmer, and ɑ lekty𝽻rer on Jeneral Edy𝽻kꞛʃon! And az hiz ɋrtikl woz ɑ dɛfens ov konstansi in marij hweđer hɋrmɷnius ɵr uđerw𝽯z, wɛ ɋr t𝽽 infẹr đat hɛ iz in fꞛvor ov kɛpiŋ w𝽽man bɛlɷ man in intelekty𝽻al dɛvelopment. ⸮Duz Mr. H𝽯n f𝽯nd đɛ mɷst h𝽯li intelekty𝽻al wimen—đɷz h𝽵z intelijens iz ɛkwal t𝽽 manz—h𝽵 kan komɑnd az lɋrj and kultivꞛted ɵdiensez—h𝽵 kan and d𝽵, mꞛk az g𝽽d spɛꞔez at W𝽽manz R𝽯ts Konvenʃonz, and r𝽯t az g𝽽d b𝽽ks az eni man k𝽽d—and, in ʃɵrt, h𝽵 ɋr hiz ɛkwalz in intelekty𝽻al abilitiz—⸮duz hɛ, 𝽯 w𝽽d ɑsk, f𝽯nd suꞔ bɛloŋiŋ t𝽽 đɛ klɑs ov inkonstant, imoral wimen. If hɛ wil p𝽳nt mɛ t𝽽 wun ov đɛz, 𝽯 wil ʃɷ him wun hundred suꞔ amuŋ đɛ les intelijent klɑs.

Mr. H𝽯n iz ɑ grꞛt stikler fɵr konsistensi, and yet, ⸮hɤ kan hiz laŋgwꞛj and kondukt bɛ rekons𝽯ld. Hɛ konsiderz w𝽽manz intelekty𝽻al infɛrioriti đɛ kɵz ov her vẹrty𝽻 and konstansi, and stil wɛ sɛ him gɷiŋ from plꞛs t𝽽 plꞛs, advokꞛtiŋ đɛ edy𝽻kꞛʃon ov đɛ masez. ⸮Hwot ɋr wɛ t𝽽 understand b𝽯 đis. ⸮Duz hɛ wont intelijens t𝽽 prɛvꞛl at đɛ ekspens ov vẹrty𝽻.

Anuđer p𝽳nt hwiꞔ ʃɷz Mr. H𝽯nz ɷpinyon in rɛgɋrd t𝽽 đɛ efekt ov intelijens, iz fɤnd in đɛ folɷiŋ 𝽯dɛɑ. “Man, if not engrɷst in biznes, w𝽽d sɛk ɑ n𝽻 mꞛt everi wɛk.” Fɵr đɛ purpus ov sɛk𝽻riŋ konstansi, hɛ ʃ𝽽d advɷkꞛt ɑ mental trꞛniŋ fɵr man đat w𝽽d kɛp him on đɛ sꞛm plꞛn ov intelekty𝽻al infɛrioriti! ⸮Hwiꞔ ɋr wɛ t𝽽 rɛgɋrd az the tr𝽵 𝽹ɛɷri, đɛ “konstansi” ov “intelekty𝽻al infɛrioriti,” ɵr đɛ inkonstansi hwiꞔ L. A. H. atriby𝽻ts t𝽽 đɛ man.

𝽮 ʃ𝽽d l𝽯k đɛ jentlman t𝽽 tel mɛ hɤ it iz, if w𝽽man iz naty𝽻rali infɛrior t𝽽 man, đat ʃɛ haz bin enꞛbld t𝽽 kɛp sɷ nɛr ɛkwal t𝽽 him az ʃɛ haz, konsideriŋ đɛ disadvɑntꞛjez and opreʃon under hwiꞔ ʃɛ haz had t𝽽 lꞛbor, az hɛ himself bɛlɛvz. 𝽮 w𝽽d ɵlsɷ ɑsk hw𝽯 it iz đat đe w𝽯z Ɵ𝽹or ov ɵl 𝽹iŋz ʃ𝽽d giv t𝽽 đis infɛrior bɛiŋ đɛ mɷst impɵrtant ɵfis, nꞛmli, đat ov fɵrmiŋ đɛ karakter, bɷ𝽹 morali and intelekty𝽻ali, ov đɛ h𝽻man rꞛs, az everi fiziolɷjist wil tel y𝽵.


Sins đɛ abuv woz ritn, 𝽯 hav red Mr. H𝽯nz ɑnser t𝽽 “Ɑ W𝽽man,” and am glad hɛ haz dɛf𝽯nd đɛ wurd intelekty𝽻al, az ɵl mꞛ not nɷ hwot hɛ mɛnz; but 𝽯 d𝽵 not 𝽹iŋk hɛ haz mꞛd hiz pɷziʃon eni mɷr konsistent. Hɛ konsiderz w𝽽man infɛrior in đɛ veri kwoliti hwiꞔ elevꞛts man abuv đɛ bɛst, and plꞛsez him nɛrer hiz Krɛꞛtor. T𝽽 w𝽽man, in komon wiđ ɵl uđer animalz, hɛ givz afekʃon; and hɛ k𝽽d hav givn hẹr nu𝽹iŋ beter, ɵlđɷ hɛ m𝽯t hav alɤd hẹr sum𝽹iŋ in adiʃon; but man alɷn kan bɷst ov intelekt, “hwiꞔ iz đɛ rɛzniŋ dɛpɋrtment ov đɛ m𝽯nd.” Sɷ ɑ w𝽽man h𝽵 kan rɛzn must bɛ mask𝽻lin, az rɛzn iz đɛ mask𝽻lin karakteristik, and ʃɛ wil bɛ inkonstant, fɵr wɛ ɋr tɷld đat it iz hẹr infɛrioriti in đis hwiꞔ sɛk𝽻rz hẹr konstansi.

Agen, hɛ sez, “If w𝽽manz intelekt had bin ɛkwal t𝽽 manz, ʃɛ never w𝽽d hav bin subj𝽻gꞛted b𝽯 him.” ⸮Duz it folɷ đat bɛkɵz wun w𝽽man haz ɑ lɋrjer fruntal dɛvelopment, ɵr đat, bɛkɵz ʃɛ rɛznz beter đan anuđer h𝽵 iz hẹr s𝽻pɛrior fizikali, ʃɛ k𝽽d subd𝽻 hẹr. It w𝽽d sɛm mɷr rɛznabl t𝽽 sꞛ đat it ʃɷd veri ʃalɷ rɛzniŋ in man, hwen hɛ did not understand đat t𝽽 subj𝽻gꞛt ɑ man bɛkɵz hɛ had mɷr br𝽵t fɷrs, woz t𝽽 kɛp himself dɤn. Mr. H. sɛmz t𝽽 𝽹iŋk đat intelekty𝽻aliti (rɛzniŋ) konflikts wiđ đɛ l𝽯f-pɋrtner doktrin, and lɛdz man t𝽽 “sɛk ɑ n𝽻 mꞛt everi wɛk.” If đis bɛ ɑ tr𝽵 𝽹ɛɷri, đɛ wimen mꞛ 𝽹aŋk him đat hɛ did not f𝽯nd đem gilti ov pozesiŋ đat dɛbꞛsiŋ kwoliti. L. A. H. mꞛ 𝽹iŋk đat w𝽽man haz but litl nɛd fɵr rɛzn ɵr justis in hẹr kapasiti, az đɛ muđer and tɛꞔer ov đɛ r𝽯ziŋ jenerꞛʃon. Hɛ iz mistꞛkn. If ʃɛ duz not nɛd ɵl đɛ rɛzn, rɛflekʃon and justis, az wel az ɵl đɛ mental fakultiz hwiꞔ ʃɛ kan posibli kɵl t𝽽 her asistans bɛfɷr hẹr famili iz hɋf rꞛzd, it iz ɑ mirakl. Ɑ ꞔ𝽯ld rꞛzd b𝽯 hiz model w𝽽man, guvernd b𝽯 impuls, not rɛzn; afekʃon, not justis; wiđ wuns in ɑ hw𝽯l ɑ litl fɛbl rɛzniŋ 𝽹rɷn in—it must be litl, as muꞔ w𝽽d mꞛk hẹr t𝽵 mask𝽻lin, and wurs, inkonstant—w𝽽d not pozes đɛ sɤndnes ov m𝽯nd, dɛsiʒon ov karakter, ɵr self-kontrɷl sɷ nesesꞛri t𝽽 ɑ w𝽽man, at lɛst hwen ʃɛ gɷz fɷr𝽹 int𝽽 đɛ w𝽯d wurld, subjekt t𝽽 đɛ insult and temtꞛʃon ov đɛ mɷst intelekty𝽻al ov ɵl 𝽹iŋz, nꞛmli, man. But L. A. H. haz nɷ rɛzn t𝽽 bɛ afrꞛd đat w𝽽man wil ɛkwal, and ʃ𝽻rli not surpas him in intelekty𝽻al akw𝽯rments, hw𝽯l ʃɛ iz left at hɷm t𝽽 tꞛk k𝽩r ov ɑ famili, ɷversɛiŋ ɑ fɋrm, milkiŋ kɤz, fɛdiŋ ꞔikenz, nursiŋ and atendiŋ t𝽽 t𝽵, 𝽹rɛ, ɵr hɋf ɑ duzn ꞔildren, woʃiŋ, 𝽯roniŋ and sɷiŋ fɵr đem ɵl, and đɛ man traveliŋ from tɤn t𝽽 tɤn, from siti t𝽽 siti, and from stꞛt t𝽽 stꞛt; gɷiŋ in đɛ best sɷs𝽯ɛti, hɛriŋ đɛ mɷst eminent spɛkerz, and atendiŋ konvenʃonz ov ɵl k𝽯ndz, đus fɛdiŋ đɛ intelekt kontiny𝽻ali. ꟝ nɷ, hɛ nɛd not fɛr fɵr manz s𝽻premasi in đis rɛspekt, at lɛst; but 𝽹aŋk fɵrty𝽻n ʃɛ iz hiz s𝽻pɛrior in h𝽻militi. Ʃɛ stꞛz at hɷm, unnɷtist, kw𝽯etli perfɵrmiŋ hẹr dꞛli lꞛbor, wiđ nɷ wun t𝽽 komend hẹr but hẹr ɷn dɛr ꞔildren, and hẹr ɷn ɛzi konʃens. Ƌus ʃɛ gɷz abrɵd t𝽽 bɛ flaterd, and egzɵlted, in his ɷn ɷpinyon at lɛst, unles hɛ bɛ ɑ veri sensibl man, indɛd.

Mr. H𝽯n sez “Ɑ W𝽽man” semz t𝽽 bɛ indignant at đɛ fakt đat ʃɛ iz infɛrior in intelekt. It iz ɵlwꞛz wel t𝽽 bɛ indignant at an untr𝽵𝽹 ov hwotever k𝽯nd; and hɛ must tr𝽯 t𝽽 gag w𝽽man b𝽯 teliŋ hẹr ʃɛ haz pr𝽵vd ʃɛ kan not rɛzon. If wimen 𝽹iŋk đꞛ hav az muꞔ intelekt az men, đꞛ hav ɑ r𝽯t t𝽽 sꞛ sɷ, ɛvn đɷ đꞛ hav nɷ vꞛn ambiʃon t𝽽 hav đ𝽩r nꞛmz apɛr in print. 𝽮 hɷp “Ɑ W𝽽man” wil giv Mr. H𝽯n ɑ g𝽽d ɑnsẹr.

—AN ENKW𝽮RER.

Isaac Pitman on the Duodecimal System

In addition to spelling reform, Isaac Pitman was an advocate for the use of duodecimal numbers (i.e. base twelve) and proposed novel types based on an inverted 2 and an inverted 3 to represent the additional two digits required for such a system. The following paragraph describing his reasoning was originally included to explain the use of the numbering in the second edition of A Tripel (Twelv Gr𝽳s) Djemz ov Wizdom, on Moral and Spiritiual Sɤbdjekts [A Triple (Twelve Gross) Gems of Wisdom, on Moral and Spiritual Subjects] (p. 8, available ɑt the Internet Archive), an 1860 book edited by Pitman which contained a selection of proverbs and other quotations printed using his English Phonetic Alphabet.

Ƌe nɤmberiŋ ov đe paragrafs bei dɤzenz and gr𝽳sez iz a kontribiɯꞔon t𝽳ardz a yɯniversal sistem ov kountiŋ, mɤni, wɛts, and mejurz, bɛst on đe nɤmber twelv and its mɤltipelz. Ƌe seinz “↊, ↋” reprezent đe nɤmberz ten and eleven, and “10” reprezents wɤn dɤzen; “16,” wɤn dɤzen and siks; 453, f𝽳r gr𝽳s, feiv dɤzen, and 𝽹r𝽰; 7,819, seven tripelz, ɛt gr𝽳s, wɤn dɤzen and nein; and s𝽳 on. It ꞔud b𝽰 konsiderd a stroŋ argiument for a twelv sistem ov n𝽳tɛꞔon đat đ𝽳 w𝽰 pr𝽳fes tu rekon bei tenz, yet w𝽰 kount artikelz in trɛd, djenerali, bei đe dɤzen and đe gr𝽳s; mɛk đe ꞔiliŋ konsist ov twelv pens; mejur bei đe fut kontɛniŋ twelv inꞔez; and diveid đe dɛ intu tɯ dɤzen ourz. It haz b𝽰n n𝽳tist ɷls𝽳 đat đe nɤmber twelv okɤrz in đe Skriptiurz m𝽳r fr𝽰kwentli đan đe nɤmber ten. Ƌe propertiz ov đe nɤmber twelv—its divizibiliti bei 2, 3, 4 and 6—ar đe ground ov đe preferens ꞔ𝽳n tu it az kompɛrd wiđ đe nɤmber ten. A sistem ov n𝽳tɛꞔon on đis bɛsis, wud b𝽰 simplisiti itself, and a n𝽳ledj ov ari𝽹metik wud “kɤm bei nɛtiur,” az dɯ r𝽰diŋ and reitiŋ bei a f𝽳netik alfabet.

The Heart Sūtra: The Insight that Brings Us to the Other Shore

The following is a phonotypic transcription of an English translation of the Heart Sūtra, a popular sūtra in Mahāyāna Buddhism. This transcription is based on the 2014 English translation by Thích Nhất Hạnh, which is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

The transcription itself uses Alexander John Ellis’s Ethnical Alphabet as presented in Ƌɛ Esenʃɑls ov Fɷnetics [The Essentials of Phonetics], itself an extension of the 1847 English Phonotypic Alphabet to better render sounds foreign to English through the use of additional letters and diacritic marks. To this end, both the final dharani, as well as several other names and words in Nhất Hạnh’s translation have been substituted with Sanskrit transliterations in accordance with Ellis’s presentation of the language in the Ethnical Alphabet on page 133 of Esenʃɑls. Several quotation marks and one paragraph break have also been added to improve readability. The phonotypic spellings of English language words have been cross-referenced with the pronunciations given in B.H. Smart’s 1836 pronouncing dictionary Walker Remodelled and are rendered in accordance with Ellis’s method of showing syllabic stress.

Uvulɷcitäʃvuru
hw𝽯l prɑctisiŋ dɛpli wi𝽹
đɛ Ins𝽯t đɑt Bringz Us tɯ đɛ Uđer Ʃɷr,
sudenli discúverd đɑt
ɵl ov đɛ f𝽯v Scundhuz ɋr ɛcwoli emtɛ,
ɑnd wi𝽹 đis rɛɑl𝽯zaʃun
hɛ ɷvercám ɵl Il-bɛiŋ.

“Lisʼn Ʃɋripɯtru,
đis Bodɛ itself iz Emtines
ɑnd Emtines itself iz đis Bodɛ.
Ƌis Bodɛ iz not uđer đɑn Emtines
ɑnd Emtines iz not uđer đɑn đis Bodɛ.
Ƌɛ sam iz trɯ ov Fɛliŋz,
Persepʃunz, Mentɑl Fɵrmaʃunz,
ɑnd Conʃusnes.

“Lisʼn Ʃɋripɯtru,
ɵl fɛnomenɋ bar đɛ mɋrc ov Emtines;
đar trɯ nat𝽻r iz đɛ nat𝽻r ov
nɷ Ber𝽹 nɷ De𝽹,
nɷ Bɛiŋ nɷ Non-bɛiŋ,
nɷ Dɛf𝽯lment nɷ P𝽻riti,
nɷ Incrɛsiŋ nɷ Dɛcrɛsiŋ.

“Ƌɑt iz hw𝽯 in Emtines,
Bodɛ, Fɛliŋz, Persepʃunz,
Mentɑl Fɵrmaʃunz ɑnd Conʃusnes
ɋr not sépɋrat self entitiz.

“Ƌɛ 𝽪tɛn Relmz ov Fɛnomenɋ
hwiꞔ ɋr đɛ sics Sens Ɵrgɑns,
đɛ sics Sens Objects,
ɑnd đɛ sics Cónʃusnesez
ɋr ɵlsɷ not sépɋrat self entitiz.

“Ƌɛ Twelv Liŋcs ov Interdɛpéndent 𝾀r𝽯ziŋ
ɑnd đar Ecstiŋcʃun
ɋr ɵlsɷ not sépɋrat self entitiz.

“Il-bɛiŋ, đɛ Cɵzez ov Il-bɛiŋ,
đɛ End ov Il-bɛiŋ, đɛ Path,
ins𝽯t ɑnd ɑtanment,
ɋr ɵlsɷ not sépɋrat self entitiz.

“Hɯéver cɑn sɛ đis
nɷ loŋger nɛdz énɛ𝽹iŋ tɯ ɑtan.

“Bɷdhisuttvus hɯ prɑctis
đɛ Ins𝽯t đɑt Bringz Us tɯ đɛ Uđer Ʃɷr
sɛ nɷ mɷr obstɑclz in đar m𝽯nd,
ɑnd bɛcɵ́z đar
ɋr nɷ mɷr obstɑclz in đar m𝽯nd,
đa cɑn ɷvercúm ɵl fɛr,
dɛstr𝽳́ ɵl roŋ persepʃunz
ɑnd rɛɑl𝽯z Perfect Nirvɋnu.

“Ɵl Bɯddhus in đɛ pɑst, prezent ɑnd f𝽻t𝽻r
b𝽯 prɑctisiŋ
đɛ Ins𝽯t đɑt Bringz Us tɯ đɛ Uđer Ʃɷr
ɋr ɵl cápɋbʼl ov ɑtaniŋ
Ɵ𝽹éntic ɑnd Perfect Enl𝽯tenment.

“Ƌerfɷr Ʃɋripɯtru,
it ʃ𝽽d bɛ nɷn đɑt
đɛ Ins𝽯t đɑt Bringz Us tɯ đɛ Uđer Ʃɷr
iz a Grat Muntru,
đɛ mɷst ilɯ́minatiŋ muntru,
đɛ h𝽯est muntru,
a muntru bɛyónd compár,
đɛ Trɯ Wizdom đɑt hɑz đɛ pɤer
tɯ p𝽽t ɑn end tɯ ɵl c𝽯ndz ov suferiŋ.

“Ƌerfɷr let us prɷclám
a muntru tɯ praz
đɛ Ins𝽯t đɑt Bringz Us tɯ đɛ Uđer Ʃɷr.

Gutä, gutä, pɋrugutä, pɋrusuŋgutä, bɷdhi svɋhɋ!”

explorations · essays · stories · oddments · home