85. Two or more words embracing the same consonants, if liable to be mistaken one for another (that is, if not distinguished by context), are, when written as isolated words, distinguished either by position, by difference of outline, or by vocalization. Words needing to be thus distinguished make up the lists of "distinguished words" as found in the text-books. So far as possible, words joined in phrases are distinguished in the same way as when standing alone. But in phrasing, the reporter's favorite method of distinction - by position - is to a large extent impracticable. Words which, standing alone, are distinguished by position cannot be thus distinguished in phrases except in two cases:

(a.) A word which begins a phrase can, of course, and generally does, retain its accustomed place, and is thus distinguished from any antagonistic or conflicting word as fully as if it were not phrased.

(b.) The second or third word of a phrase is sometimes brought into its normal position by displacing the preceding word or words, as explained in the last chapter.

*Mr. Clarence E. Walker, in his recent work entitled "Speed and Legibility," draws this acute and important distinction between "a preceding context" and "a succeeding context:" "Forms which . . have to be determined from context can be safely used, if a preceding context determines them; but where you have to refer to a succeeding context, unless an immediately succeeding context, your reading will suffer, even though such determination can always be made."

86. As, in phrases, positional distinction between words liable to conflict is in most cases lost, care must be taken that, if necessary, some other and effective method of distinction be substituted. We should, however, discriminate between words ordinarily written in position because they need to be so distinguished, and words which are in no danger of conflict, which can readily be distinguished by context, but which, when standing alone, are written in position, not because there is danger from some conflicting word of similar outline, but merely in deference to a general rule of locating words according to their accented vowels. Astonishingly numerous are the words which lose their positional distinction in phrases, and yet, with no substituted method of distinction, are perfectly legible. For example, some and seem, mind and amount, etc., when written separately, are written in position in accordance with their accented vowels; but in such phrases as there are some, it may seem, to my mind, large amount, the ordinary positional distinction between some and seem, mind and amount, is lost; yet (thanks to that potent friend of the reporter, context), there is no loss of legibility.

87. To know what words commonly written in position may be phrased without regard to position or any other

method of distinction, is a species of knowledge which the young reporter will gradually learn from practice upon such exercises as this book gives. In determining whether any particular word, ordinarily written in position, may be freely introduced in phrases without positional or other distinction, the question to be asked is, can this word be recognized infallibly by its outline alone, or must it, because similar in outline to some other word, be in some way distinguished? In the case of a word which, standing alone, is necessarily distinguished by position, the loss of positional distinction may be supplied in phrases, first, by the rule of Exclusion (a method of distinction peculiar to phrasing); or, second, by Difference of Outline (sometimes called "Variation"); or, third, by Vocalization.