But, let us see, what made us say that he
derived the spoken
words from the printed by means of the rule of the
alphabet?
Isn't all we know that we told him that this letter was
pronounced this way, that letter that way, etc., and that
he afterwards read out words in the Cyrillic script?
What suggests itself to us as an answer is that he must have
shown somehow that he did actually make the transition from the
printed to the spoken words by means of the rule of the alphabet which
we had given him.
And what we mean by his showing this will certainly get clearer if we
alter our example and
70)
. assume that he reads
off a text by transcribing it, say, from block letters into cursive
script.
For in this case we can assume the rule of the alphabet to have been
given in the form of a table which shows the block alphabet and the
cursive alphabet in parallel columns.
Then the
deriving the copy from the text we should imagine
this way: The person who copies looks
74.
up the table for each letter at
frequent intervals, or he says to himself such things as,
“Now what's a small
a
like?”, or he tries to visualize the table, refraining
from actually looking at it. ‒ ‒