VIII.

[Professor Sauveur was not present to read his paper upon "The Natural Method of Teaching Languages.' The following is the discussion upon the topics.]

REMARKS OF C. W. BARDEEN, EDITOR OF THE SCHOOL BULLETIN.

Mr. Chancellor and Members of the Convocation. I think I can best justify the plea for sympathy in my behalf the Chancellor has just made by relating the substance of the conversation that brought me here. Principal Bradley, whom it is always difficult to refuse, came to me last night and said that as Professor Sauveur would not be here this morning he wanted me to stand up and say something in the time Professor Sauveur would have occupied.

"But I don't know anything about the natural method of teaching languages,” I said.

"That is nothing" he replied; "the discussion is going to be on the other side. You will really be a sort of ninepin set up to be' bowled down. It doesn't make much difference what wood the ninepin is made of; it is the bowling we are interested in. We want somebody who doesn't mind being knocked down, and we choose you because you are used to it."

With this introduction you will understand the circumstances under which I appear. It is not the old illustration of a little man rattling around in a big man's shoes, but a new one of a dummy set up, scare-crow like, to keep the field open till the real man comes in later.

Preliminary to a discussion of this subject, I suppose there must be some agreement as to what the purpose should be in teaching modern languages.

Shall the attempt be to enable the student to read the language with tolerable readiness, leaving the speaking of it to be attained at some future time if there is special occasion for it? This is, as I understand it, the claim of Professor Whitney, in the preface to his German Grammar. Or shall stress be put upon the conversational element, enabling the student to understand readily and to speak fluently the phrases of ordinary intercourse? This may be regarded as the immediate purpose of the natural method." Or, again, shall the teacher hope to make accomplished linguists of his students, mastering the language in all its intricacies, and speaking it so that it shall seem his vernacular?

66

This last, so far as the possibilities of ordinary instruction extend, is the dream only of young teachers. In French, for instance, one's humiliation in his first attempts to speak as Parisians speak is measured only by the confidence with which he undertakes it. Take a single and simple illustration. The first day I was in Paris

I went up to one of the little newspaper stands and asked the old woman if she had a copy of Figaro.-"Of Figaro? O oui monsieur," she replied, cheerfully correcting my accent. Glad to be instructed, I was careful the next morning to inquire of the same old woman for a copy of Figaro. "Of Figaro? mais, oui monsieur," and the correction was as cheerful and as positive as before. Deterinined at least to know how one French word was pronounced I went to the Opera Comique to hear the Barber of Seville. Before the first act had proceeded far the call came," Figaro! Figaro! Figaro!" "It was unmistakable; the accent was upon the second syllable. Just as I was settling myself down to this one positive conviction, Figaro came upon the stage and began with volubility to complain of the frequent calls made upon Figaro! Figaro! Figaro!" Figaro! The French do not accent their words at all, says one. The accent is not arbitrary, but is a sort of stress of emotion, says another. All I know is that whatever syllable I accent, or if I accent syllable at all, I am equally sure to be corrected in Paris.

66

There are many stock ancedotes that illustrate the same point. Take the well-known story, told by Dr. Sauveur himself, I believe, of two literary Englishmen in Paris. One went out earlier than the other, and said to the servant, "Ne laissez pas sortir le feu" (Don't let the fire "go out"). Unhappily he pronounced the last word more like fou (fool), and the servant interpreted it, "don't let that maniac get out of the room." Presently the maniac wanted to visit the Louvre, and was astonished to be met at the door with first advice, then entreaty, then expostulation, and finally command not to pass the threshold, and his friend returned to find him struggling with four men who were holding him down to the floor. It was like the pathetic ballad that used to be a favorite at school exhibitions when I was a boy,

etc., and ending

Stay, jailer, stay and hear my woe,

I am not mad, I am not mad,

only in this case the victim was mad, mad as a hornet.

They tell of another Englishman who meant to say, as he sat down in a restaurant, "J'ai faim" (I am hungry), But he pronounced it so that the waiter undertood him, "J'ai une femme" (I have a wife). The Parisian waiter is never astonished, and he replied gravely, "J'espère que madame se porte bien." Seeing that he was misunderstood the Englishman made another attempt. Je suis fameux," he said undoubtedly meaning to assert that he was famishing, but really declaring himself famous.-"Je suis bien aise de le savoir," replied the waiter with deference. Then the Englishman girded up his loins and made a final effort, declaring, "Je suis femme (I am a woman), to which the waiter could only reply "Alors madame s'habille d'une façon tres étrange" (Then madame attires herself after a queer fashion); and the Englishman fled.

I think we may set it aside as impracticable that the average

student shall master French or German so that it shall be to him as his own tongue; and the question before us becomes reduced to this Shall we start with the grammar and give a scientific knowledge of the language, for reading; or shall we start with conversation and give a fluent knowledge of a few phrases of the language, for speaking.

In favor of the first it may be said that except to those who travel in Europe the occasions for spoken French are few, while almost every book one takes up has quotations or allusions that require one to be able to translate French readily. Moreover the traditional method of learning Latin and Greek, which are usually undertaken before the modern languages, has prepared the student for the application of the same method to French and German, his knowledge of all four languages being broadened by the sort of comparative grammar he thus insensibly acquires.

It will also be the verdict of most teachers that this grammatical knowledge is the only sound basis for conversational use of the language; and that while it is true that it is not the means through which the infant learns to speak his own language correctly, on the other hand there is no warrant for assuming that the disciplined mind of youth will work to most advantage by imitating the haphazard gropings of childhood. When one becomes a man he puts away childish methods, as well as childish things.

On the other hand, it is claimed by the advocates of the natural method that to begin with the grammar is a positive bar to fluency in speaking and especially to readiness in understanding a foreign language. Book-knowledge of a language is knowledge by the eye, not the ear. "Est ce que vous pouvez m'entendre? As I spoke that sentence, I dare say every one of you consciously or unconsciously put those spoken words into printed form and saw them in your mind's eye before you recognized them. The spoken words did not convey the idea directly. You went through the intermediate processes of thinking how the sounds I uttered were spelled in French, of printing them out before the eye as thus spelled, and then and only then, of translating them as you would have translated them if printed in a book.

Now these intermediate processess, however unconscious they may be, are a bar to fluent conversation. If the "natural method can ensure understanding by the ear without the intervention of the eye, it establishes a positive point in its favor. Again, it begets confidence. After a rebuff or two in conversation, book-French becomes untrustworthy. Practice in inquiry as to whether one has the silver pencil-case of the wife of your cousin's father-in-law, does not prepare one to order a successful dinner at a restaurant. For actual utility the few phrases in Bædeker's hand-book, half-pronounced, will sometimes procure a man what he wants in a foreign country, when a man who can read Corinne at sight is at a loss. You all remember the story of the man who happened to be at a

place in Germany where the special delicacy was its mushrooms. He wanted some, but he did not know the German word for mushroom; so after numerous failures to make the waiter comprehend he took out his pencil and sketched upon the bill of fare a picture of the vegetable. "Ja! Ja!" cried the waiter in delight, and

rushed off to return in a moment with a raised umbrella.

As a matter of fact what might be called the official vocabulary of traveling is short. With a few score of phrases well in hand, a little ingenuity in variation of expression will enable one to make one's self understood in regard to almost anything outside the realm of abstract ideas. A Syracuse woman who had taken one of the five weeks' courses in German declared to me that she could express in that language every thought that came into her mind, and I rather think she could. It would not require a large vocabulary.

Of course to an intelligent person mastery of French or German is the study of a lifetime, as mastery of English is the study of a lifetime. What five-weeks' course would give Professor Root the command of English he showed in his final remarks, yesterday afternoon, when every word, always the exact word, fell pat into its place without pause or effort? But there is much in getting a start, so that one may feel sure of comprehending and answering properly the first phrases of a foreign tongue that are likely to fall upon his ear. This readiness and confidence the "natural method" secures, and it is no small advantage.

There may be overconfidence. The principal opposition to this method comes from the extravagant claims of some of its followers. I am told that Professor Sauveur states that he can impart to an intelligent student a through knowledge of French if he can have him five hours a day for a year. This means eight hundred hours of solid work; and the claim is not unreasonable. It is probable that a competent teacher could attain this result in this time by any method.

In a conversation on this subject, the other day, Professor White, of Cornell University, asked what preparation in the time they could give there was of most service to students likely to become teachers. I replied that I thought they should certainly have along with their grammatical knowledge enough practice in conversation to make them confident in the simple phrases of ordinary intercourse. I think this confidence may probably be obtained most quickly through the Sauveur method, and I should deem it of great advantage to a student thoroughly grounded in grammar to take a supplementary course or two in one of these summer schools.

I have no doubt that for young children this is the proper method. The important consideration for them is the pronunciation, which they can secure under competent instruction while their vocal organs are flexible.

Beyond this I am unable to express opinion. I have spoken without special preparation, and without other than mere general

impressions upon the subject. None of you can have so much occasion as I have to regret that Dr. Sauveur is not present to speak for himself.

REMARKS OF PRINCIPAL F. J. CHENEY.

Mr. Chancellor, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Convocation. — My regret that Dr. Sauveur is not present to-day has been expressed by those who have preceded me. I wish to say, however, that in a brief correspondence with me, he said the subject assigned him. upon the programme was not exactly the subject that he understood he was to speak upon. His idea was simply to discuss a method of teaching ancient languages. It was not his purpose to discuss the natural method of teaching modern languages. He also stated that he did not for a moment unndertake to apply to the teaching of the ancient languages, the modern or the natural method, pure and simple, but that if anybody desired to know what his statements with regard to this matter would be, they would find them principally in a little pamphlet that he had issued entitled "An introduction to the te ching of ancient languages." I presume that nearly all if not all the persons present have read that pamphlet. The method of teaching Latin I believe is given in the pamphlet. It is briefly stated, something like this: He brings his pupils up before him, those who have not yet learned any Latin, and opens to them a book of Cæsar. The book that he himself holds contains not an interlinear but a literal translation of the text at the end of the volume. The book that the pupils hold before them contain neither an interlinear nor a literal translation; but in his "Talks with Cæsar" he puts an English translation far from their sight, that is the way I believe he puts it, in the back part of the book. For the first lesson he takes the first six lines of the first chapter of Cæsar. The pupils are kept at this until it is committed to memory. He reads and rereads it over for them, using the Roman pronunciation. He pronounces every word distinctly, giving every vowel its proper sound whether long or short, giving proper emphasis to the words or to sentences, as the case may be, that are emphatic. He then talks with those pupils asking them questions in Latin about the subject-matter of the lesson; they are compelled to repeat again and again these five or six lines of Cæsar. For the next lesson, and in this first lesson also, he would translate this Latin for them so they may understand the meaning of the words they have been learning. In the next lesson he takes another portion of Cæsar, and so on for about three months. He would require his class, in learning this Cæsar, to recite together or in turn every word they have learned, every day, until they have learned about thirty chapters. Now, of course, he meets an objection that he knows will arise in the minds of those who may be studying his method. "What about the construction of the language?"What about the cases of substantives ?" "What about