Three rings

From Phonographic World in 1889, an article that rang several of my bells.

1. This may be the first letter from an Okie in any published journal. The eastern part of Okla was in the middle of the first Land Run at that moment, and the only Euros in the state were in missions and federal installations.

2. A serious and correct understanding of language, which was almost nonexistent in academia at that time.

3. The peculiar failed universal language Volapuk.

= = = = = START QUOTE:

The WORLD received some time since from Mr. Lewis F. Hadley, of Muskogee, I. T., author of the system of Indian Sign Language (whereby the natives are taught to read by means of a collection of pictures, in place of letters and words), a letter setting forth Mr. Hadley’s views concerning the invention and publication of a system of Volapuk shorthand, or a common shorthand intelligible to the whole world. The idea was secondary in importance with him, however, to his interest in his life’s work, looking to the education of the Indian, and was not carried to an issue. The subject is, however, a most interesting one, and one which cannot long remain unnoticed.

Various systems of shorthand have been used to some extent during the past few years in Volapuk correspondence, but their entire unsuitability for the purpose is apparent. The unique structure of Volapuk demands an entirely new system, sui generis. That attention has been given to the subject by Vpans is shown by the fact that at the present time there are at least three systems of Volapuk stenography extant.

= = = = = END QUOTE.

The journal included several ads for Volapuk books and courses. People who wrote about stenography were language fans who understood how language works. Most systems of shorthand were based on an accurate view of real phonetics and phonemics, unlike most systems of “reformed spelling” or telegraph codes. Telegraph codes often used the same sign for I and J, and the same sign for U and V, while wasting a separate sign on Q, in a mindless imitation of classical Latin.

= = = = = START QUOTE:

It need hardly be said that any language, to become generally accepted, must be capable of being both spoken and written. This is inherently necessary. Whether Volapuk fulfils the first requirement is disputed; but certain it is that it exists to-day as a written language only. When its sounds shall be simplified and made euphonious, no doubt it may, in its own sphere, become current as a spoken language. But considered as a written language, is Volapuk all that could be desired? Let us see. When spoken sounds represent ideas, according to any system of language, their enunciation is made with an economy of time and labor commensurate with and corresponding to their proper formation. An idea is formed. Instantly the tongue forms the appropriate sounds to convey the idea, which is apprehended when the sounds are heard. It is not necessary in oral communications in a familiar language to individualize and separate the constituent sounds of a word, and give detailed expression to each. The sounds of the separate letters are spoken in their entirety as words. But in the written representation of a language it is entirely different. There, the elements of each expression, represented by signs corresponding to the vocal sounds, are considered necessary to be given in their primary form, as each letter in the spoken language might be separately sounded. In other words, there is an elementary method of speaking, as there is an elementary method of writing a language. But, while the oral representation is developed into a more comprehensive method of communication, the elementary mode of writing is persistently adhered to in all languages.

= = = = = END QUOTE.

Remarkably clear and correct.

I remember trying to study Volapuk. I was in 9th grade, in an intense period of language learning. All at once I picked up the basics of Russian, German and Esperanto. While looking through the K-State library for Esperanto books, I encountered Volapuk. It struck me immediately as a stupid and misguided effort, which missed ALL the goals for a universal language. As these writers observed, it was opaque, difficult to speak, and sounded ugly. Esperanto, despite many faults, was easily accessible to any Euro and sounded pretty.